We now know what it takes to establish common carrier pipeline status in Texas. According to the Texas Supreme Court in Denbury Green Pipeline Texas LLC v. Texas Rice Land Partners Ltd., all that is required is a reasonable probability that the pipeline will, at some point after construction, serve the public by transporting
Denbury Part II: Big Changes Coming in Texas Pipeline Condemnations ?
Co-Author Martin P. Averill
Is Denbury’s Green Pipeline a common carrier? That question is alive and well in Texas. In Texas Rice Land Partners Ltd. v. Denbury Green-Texas Pipeline, LLC, the Beaumont court of appeals reversed a summary judgment granted by the trial court to Denbury, applying the Texas Supreme Court’s “reasonable probability” of
Native Gas and Storage Gas: Who Owns It?
Northern National Gas Company vs. Approximately 9117 Acres in Pratt, Camden and Reno Counties, Kansas shows the relationship between Kansas oil and gas law and the Kansas Underground Storage Act (KSA §55-1201 et seq).
The result: Obtaining authority to condemn a subsurface reservoir works no instantaneous change of ownership in storage gas under Kansas
Reaping What You Sow – City of Dallas Sued by Trinity East Energy
Suppose I own a large tract of land in the region of the Barnett Shale, the exclusive right to allow (or prevent) drilling on the aforesaid land, and a desparate need for funds. You have $19 million and the desire to exploit the minerals. I take your $19 million, and when you ask for permission
For Success Against a Pipeline, Go to the Right Court
The first step in successfully challenging the Keystone Pipeline: Choose a court that has jurisdiction. Mr. Bishop learned that lesson the hard way in Bishop v. TransCanada Keystone Pipeline.
Mr. Bishop lived in Nacogdoches County, Texas, when TransCanada attempted to negotiate an easement and pipeline right-of-way. Those negotiations failed and TransCanada brought a condemnation proceeding.
Surface Owner’s Regulatory Taking Claim Denied
Co-author Alexandra A. Crawley
In Walton v. City of Midland, the surface owner of a 35 acre tract within the city limits of Midland, Texas, contended that a provision in a city permit for an oil or gas well was a regulatory taking because it required the lessee to drill a water well on
Pipeline Loses Effort to Condemn Private Land
Co-author Chance Decker
Private property rights advocates scored a big victory in a Texas condemnation case in the ongoing battle between pipelines and landowners over the power of eminent domain. (See our last post for a decision with the opposite result).
An appeals court in Crosstex NGL Pipeline, LP v. Reins Road Farms, Ltd. denied
Keystone XL Can Take Land Before Appeals are Exhausted
Co-author Chance Decker
Two recent cases from the same Texas court reflect the ongoing uncertainty over the threat to private property rights posed by the Keystone XL and other pipelines. Is there a theme, a common thread, running through law on this subject? Not in Texas. Today we discuss one of these decisions, Next time
Large Condemnation Award Upheld for Eagle Ford Pipeline
By Travis Booher
“Money isn’t everything, Jett.” Leslie Benedict.
“Not when you’ve got it.” Jett Rink
The ageless struggle between the oil man and the rancher continues. The Texas Supreme Court declined to review LaSalle Pipeline, LP v. Donnell Lands, L.P., (the link is the court of appeals opinion) a pipeline condemnation suit involving
Private Property Rights Rule Over Pipeline
In a vindication of landowners’ rights, the Texas Supreme Court prohibited a pipeline owner from using eminent domain to take private property. In Texas Rice Land Partners, Ltd. v. Denbury Green Pipeline-Texas, LLC, the court said that a pipeline must show that it satisfies the requirements for common-carrier status before it will be allowed