E&A Exploration and Production Royalty 
The Energy Law Blog
JUNE 8, 2020
With the prevalence of cases involving royalty disputes in Texas, the state’s Supreme Court has never hesitated to address these issues. But the Court’s sporadic holdings regarding royalty clauses, each so specific to the particular language of the lease, have left lessees on unsteady footing. Heritage Res., NationsBank , 939 S.W.2d
The Energy Law Blog
JUNE 12, 2017
On June 2, 2017 the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeal affirmed a trial court’s judgment cancelling a mineral lease under Mineral Code article 140 and provided further clarity on a production in paying quantities analysis under Louisiana Mineral Code article 124. [1] Tauren Exploration, Inc. Tauren Exploration, Inc.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The Energy Law Blog
OCTOBER 4, 2018
In August 2018, dry natural gas production from the Haynesville shale averaged 6.774 billion cubic feet per day, which is the highest daily Haynesville production average since September 2012 when production averaged 6.962 billion cubic feet per day. El Paso E & P Co. , El Paso E & P Co. ,
The Energy Law Blog
MAY 22, 2023
The rising demand for lithium, combined with Federal tax credits for lithium production, has intensified lithium exploration efforts. Formed during the Jurassic period, this geological formation has been tapped for oil and gas, as well as brine for production of bromine, since the 1950s.
The Energy Law Blog
MARCH 26, 2019
District Court for the Western District of Louisiana held that a unit operator may not recover post-production costs from an unleased mineral owner’s share of production proceeds in Allen Johnson, et al. 30:10 governed whether a unit operator may deduct post-production costs against UMO’s share of production proceeds. [3]
The Energy Law Blog
SEPTEMBER 23, 2008
Title I addresses the existing moratoria, future OCS access, exploration, production and royalty questions. per MMBtu, unless lease royalties were renegotiated with the Secretary , imposes Conservation of Resources Fee on nonproducing lease acreage of $3.75
The Energy Law Blog
APRIL 19, 2021
In Eagle II , TRO-X alleged that Eagle failed to pay TRO-X its share of income generated from production on the equitable interests. Several years later, Eagle purchased several leases and sold them to Chesapeake Exploration, LLC (“Chesapeake”), reserving an overriding royalty interest and a back-in working interest (the “Interests”).
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content