This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The “ LL&E II ” decision finds that Act 312 charges the court, not the jury, to determine the funding needed to remediate property to government standards. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1]. Background of Legacy Litigation and LL&E I . In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. LL&E II , at *2.
Following discovery, Parsons filed a motion for summary judgment premised on Plaintiffs’ inability to establish Mr. Steib’s co-workers and six individuals deposed in unrelated asbestos cases that Plaintiffs argued established Mr. Steib’s exposure. Lamorak Ins. 20-0424 (La. In 2018, Charles Steib (“Mr. at 12 (emphasis added).
Additionally, a motion to recuse was filed to remove Justice Crain from the case. Justice Crain had been previously removed from a case involving the Talbot, Carmouche, and Marcello law firm; however, in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court denied Plaintiff’s request, allowing Justice Crain to consider the writ application.
In two companion cases, a panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decided whether a federal district court could properly exercise jurisdiction over climate change suits brought against energy companies by cities and counties in California. . 1442(a)(1). In City of Oakland et al. BP PLC et al. 1442(a)(1).
Following discovery, Parsons filed a motion for summary judgment premised on Plaintiffs’ inability to establish Mr. Steib’s co-workers and six individuals deposed in unrelated asbestos cases that Plaintiffs argued established Mr. Steib’s exposure. Lamorak Ins. 20-0424 (La. In 2018, Charles Steib (“Mr. at 12 (emphasis added).
Now the case is before the Texas Supreme Court, with a recently submitted amicus brief containing the argument that could turn the tides back in the lessees’ favor. Now the case is before the Texas Supreme Court, with a recently submitted amicus brief containing the argument that could turn the tides back in the lessees’ favor.
Baker Hughes a G E Co., One of the Facility Defendants removed the case to federal court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction, arguing that complete diversity existed between all properly joined defendants and the Plaintiffs. In D & J Invs. of Cenla, L.L.C. 17, 2022) (hereinafter “ D & J Invs.
Additionally, a motion to recuse was filed to remove Justice Crain from the case. Justice Crain had been previously removed from a case involving the Talbot, Carmouche, and Marcello law firm; however, in this case, the Louisiana Supreme Court denied Plaintiff’s request, allowing Justice Crain to consider the writ application.
Procedural History The case was originally tried in a forty-one day bench trial by Judge John P. On March 29, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its ruling in In re: Petition of Frescati Shipping Co., as Owner of the M/T ATHOS I , Nos. 16-3552, 16-3867 & 16-3868 (3d Cir. 2701, et seq.
17, 2023), in which it re-affirmed the axiomatic principle that a text retains the same meaning in the present day as when it was drafted. In support of that notion, the Court cited the 1957 Texas Supreme Court case Garrett v. In addition to the estate misconception theory, the Court analyzed the “legacy of the one-eighth royalty.”
The trial court granted the defendants’ motion and ruled that the only evidence to be presented to the jury was that of amounts actually paid under the fee schedule. Cornerstone Investments, LLC, et al. 2018-CC-0735 (La. The court of appeal denied the plaintiff’s writ in a 2-1 decision. Simmons at 3-4. Bozovic Marine, Inc. , Simmons at 7.
As was the case in 2012, this proposed amendment would also extend this direct payment requirement to any overriding royalty interests burdening the nonparticipating owner’s lease. On Friday, March 31, 2023, Representative Larry Bagley of Louisiana’s District 7 proposed amendments to Louisiana Revised Statutes § 30:10. Perhaps time will tell.
The “ LL&E II ” decision finds that Act 312 charges the court, not the jury, to determine the funding needed to remediate property to government standards. 3d — (“ LL&E II ”). [1]. Background of Legacy Litigation and LL&E I . In the landmark oilfield remediation case Corbello v. LL&E II , at *2.
The Louisiana Legislature’s 2023 Regular Session begins on April 10th, and last Friday, Louisiana Senator Allain of District 21 filed SB 154 proposing to enact a statutory framework directly governing the rights and obligations of parties to renewable energy leases. 122); The lessee of a renewable energy lease would be “bound to. compare to La.
A Regulatory Increase to the Limits of Liability for Oil Pollution and an Amendment Exempting Small Passenger Vessels from the Limitation of Liability Act Present New Challenges for Vessel Owners U.S. First, the Coast Guard announced [1] increases to the liability limits in the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA”). [2]
The Supreme Court of New York (New York’s court of first impression) found that the Attorney General “failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that ExxonMobil violated [New York state law] in connection with its public disclosures concerning how ExxonMobil accounted for past, present and future climate change risks.”
Riverwood to state court, unpersuaded that he “may or must exercise simultaneous jurisdiction by acting on a matter presented to the Fifth Circuit for decision in a case where appellate proceedings are not final but, instead, remain active.” The case is The Parish of Plaquemines v. Riverwood Production Co. , 18-5217 (E.D.
The suit attracted national attention, alleging that past and present operations of the oil and gas industry—most specifically, dredging of canals—contributed to land loss on a massive scale and rendered defendants liable for billions in damages and restoration costs. Judge Brown did not take up the defendants’ other motions.
The distributor argued that the inclusion of its request for injunctive relief brought the case under the carve-out in the arbitration provision. This is now the second time this case has been before the Supreme Court on issues of arbitrability.
Thus, the issue presented was whether the letters relied upon by Kelly satisfied the requirements of La. Louisiana Revised Statutes 30:103.1 have been heavily litigated in recent years, but there are only a handful of reported decisions interpreting these statutes. Kelly Land Company, L.L.C. Aethon Energy Operating, L.L.C. , 4th 369 (5th Cir.
Had the Court of Appeals granted the writ, the district court’s decision would have been reversed and the upcoming test-case trial would have been stopped for lack of jurisdiction and venue. While the Court ultimately denied the writ, it did so in a way that advanced the defendants’ case. Judge Jerry E. 17-10812 (5th Cir.
24, 2021), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed a question that has increasingly become a sticking point in Louisiana “legacy” cases: whether claims brought under a Louisiana citizen suit provision for alleged violations of state environmental regulations can be heard in federal court. 20-30224 (5th Cir.
Riverwood to state court, unpersuaded that he “may or must exercise simultaneous jurisdiction by acting on a matter presented to the Fifth Circuit for decision in a case where appellate proceedings are not final but, instead, remain active.”. The case is The Parish of Plaquemines v. Riverwood Production Co. , 18-5217 (E.D.
The Louisiana Supreme Court addressed the role of the Louisiana Tax Commission in its decision in the case of D90 Energy, LLC v. Jefferson Davis Parish Board of Review , No. 2020-C000200. Louisiana property is assessed by the assessor for the parish where the property is located.
The Louisiana Supreme Court addressed the role of the Louisiana Tax Commission in its decision in the case of D90 Energy, LLC v. Jefferson Davis Parish Board of Review , No. 2020-C000200. Louisiana property is assessed by the assessor for the parish where the property is located.
Ruby’s participation in desegregation followed the 1954 Supreme Court case Brown v. Liskow & Lewis was honored to celebrate its 15 th annual Black History Month Program with such special guests who paved the way for the diverse culture that is present today. Judge Jackson met Ruby when he reconnected her with one of the U.S.
Most American maritime and environmental attorneys and vessel owners are familiar with OPA 90 and oil spill liability in the United States. But what happens when a vessel spills oil in the territorial waters of another country? The CLC addresses civil liability for maritime oil spills. Report a spill 2. Cooperate in response 3. Failure to a.
The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in a case that could substantially clarify, or even fundamentally reshape, the characterization and ownership of underground storage rights in Texas. The case was Myers-Woodward v. The case remains pending before the Texas Supreme Court on petition for review.
Today the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in this landmark case concerning punitive damages. The question presented was whether punitive damages may be awarded to a Jones Act seaman in a personal injury suit alleging a breach of the general maritime duty to provide a seaworthy vessel. Estis Well Service , 768 F.3d
24, 2021), the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed a question that has increasingly become a sticking point in Louisiana “legacy” cases: whether claims brought under a Louisiana citizen suit provision for alleged violations of state environmental regulations can be heard in federal court. 20-30224 (5th Cir.
The distributor argued that the inclusion of its request for injunctive relief brought the case under the carve-out in the arbitration provision. This is now the second time this case has been before the Supreme Court on issues of arbitrability.
30:10 was inapplicable to the case because the costs outlined in the statute comprised only pre-production and production costs. 30:10 was inapplicable to the case because the costs outlined in the statute comprised only pre-production and production costs. Chesapeake Louisiana, LP. [1] 2] The UMOs argued that La. 8] However, La.
Hastings, it was “unclear how many people actually work in the IRU, what their backgrounds and expertise are,” whether they “serv[e] in a law enforcement capacity” or are authorized to carry firearms, and “how they are to interact with witnesses or collect evidence.” The head of the IRU reports to the BSEE Director. Richard Hastings (R-Wash.),
Every conscientious individual and company has been forced to do the best that they can, with the reality presented. Once we go back to the new normal we expect that each E&P company will decide which is the most suitable for their needs, in-person or virtual? The criteria will depend on each use case.
This case boasts a lengthy and varied procedural history, but the opinion at issue came after a jury found Unocal responsible for “environmental damage” as defined under Act 312 and awarded $3.5 Act 312 provides that any limited admission is admissible in evidence at trial and Unocal’s limited admission was presented to the jury in this case.
In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. allowing an $81 million judgment against the oil company to stand. Charles refinery. In the original judgment , U.S. million dollars.
In a case sure to be used as a sword by many defendants in the prevalent NORM (naturally occurring radioactive material) litigation in Louisiana and elsewhere, Patricia Lennie, et al. In doing so, the Fifth Circuit distinguished a prior case, Lester v. Exxon Mobil Corporation, et al., Exxon Mobil Corp., 10-743 (La. 5/31/12), 102 So.3d
First, the Appellant did not present any facts or evidence of Defendants’ alleged concealment of the claims, and even if Defendants did conceal the claims, the concealment ended by 2006, when the Petition to Open Succession with Administration was filed demonstrating knowledge of these potential claims. The Succession of Mayo Romero.
Dicharry and Robert E. To further BSEE’s goals, the NTL provides lessees with instructions for preparing their OSRPs, which are presented in an outline suggesting the organization and contents of OSRPs. By Sarah Y. Many of the clarifications are based on lessons learned from the Deepwater Horizon incident. 30 CFR 254.23. 30 CFR 254.23(g)(2).
At best, the Court found the relators were the original source of alleged Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act violations, but because they failed to present any evidence that those purported violations induced false claims to the government, they were not FCA ones. In John King, et al v. in taxable costs to the defendants. Reg’l Healthcare Sys.,
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. Bringing to mind the infamous Hatfield-McCoy family feud, Concho Resources, Inc. See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex.
The tables turned again at the Texas Supreme Court, which ultimately held that the boundary stipulation was valid and that the defendants conclusively established their ratification defense, but the case is still ongoing. Bringing to mind the infamous Hatfield-McCoy family feud, Concho Resources, Inc. See 2021 WL 1432222 (Tex.
It has been an extraordinary few weeks as businesses face challenges presented by the COVID-19 outbreak. In such cases, hedge counterparties may increase calls for margin and collateral posting both in frequency and amount. Understandably, assessments of significant contractual and market exposures have been prioritized. .
First, the Appellant did not present any facts or evidence of Defendants’ alleged concealment of the claims, and even if Defendants did conceal the claims, the concealment ended by 2006, when the Petition to Open Succession with Administration was filed demonstrating knowledge of these potential claims. The Succession of Mayo Romero. .
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content