Co-author Rusty TuckerSan Miguel Electric Coop is a Texas nonprofit electric cooperative that owns and operates a power plant that supplies electricity to 38 Texas counties. After a four-week absence, they return to these pages, this time in DCP Sand Hills Pipeline, LLC v. San Miguel Elec. Coop., Inc. Read on to learn about the “paramount importance doctrine”.Continue Reading Lignite Lease Prevails Over Pipeline Easement
There is “new news” and there is the same-old-same-old. Today is mostly the latter but it seems more “out there” than in it used to be.
The Pennsylvania Attorney General convened a grand jury that slammed regulatory failures in Pennsylvania gas drilling and recommended setbacks that would effectively destroy the ability to develop shale resources.
If you follow the Marcellus shale there are political developments you should know about. Daniel Markind, a partner in the Philadelphia office of Flaster Greenberg PC, gave me permission to share this recent blog post.
Devastated By Coronavirus, New York’s Pipeline Politics Ensure A Tougher Second Round
By: This article originally ran on Forbes.com on May 20, 2020. All rights reserved.
Approximately 30% of all confirmed coronavirus cases in the United States have been reported in the New York City metropolitan area, which is located mainly in southeastern New York state and northeastern New Jersey. Last weekend, the administrations of the Governors of both states, Andrew Cuomo of New York and Phil Murphy of New Jersey, rejected once again the key permits for the Northeast Supply Enhancement Project (NESE), a natural gas pipeline that would have ensured sufficient natural gas supply to much of New York City and its environs. These decisions probably mean the death of NESE.
Click here to read the article in its entirety on Forbes.com.
Continue Reading Marcellus Pipeline Permits Rejected by New York and New Jersey
It is no surprise to Texas Supreme Court watchers that in Energy Transfer Partners et al v. Enterprise Products Partners LP et al. the court rejected claims that the parties had created a partnership by actions that varied from the terms of written contracts. The court concluded that parties can conclusively agree that no
Co-authors Lydia Webb and Rusty TuckerUntil Monarch Midstream v. Badlands Energy, midstream companies facing rejection of their contracts in a producer’s bankruptcy were left with Abraham Lincoln’s least favorite negotiating option: If the both law and the facts are against you, pound on the table. Under Sabine (which we covered here, here, and here) gathering agreements are not covenants running with the land and can be rejected in the producer’s bankruptcy. Sabine was the only law on the books, but now a Colorado bankruptcy court has determined that a gathering agreement was a covenant running with the land.
Continue Reading Midstream Dedications – Colorado Bankruptcy Court Levels the Playing Field
In Mary et al. QEP Energy Company the question was, given an encroachment of a pipeline onto the property of another, what is the test for determining the good faith, or not, of the party in possession?
Ms. Mary and QED were parties to a Pipeline Servitude Agreement and what appears to be an oil and gas lease (the court could have just called it that). Ms. Mary et al claimed that QED’s gas pipelines unlawfully extended onto their property by 31 feet and 15 feet and sought disgorgement of the profits derived from the pipelines. The issue was to determine the source of the liability of QED, the encroacher, which would determine damages.
Continue Reading What is the Test For Good Faith in the Louisiana Civil Code?
Today is a two-fer. The questions: When does the “merger doctrine” not work in Texas, and how do courts treat technological developments created after a contract becomes effective?
In Murphy Land Group LLC v. Atmos Energy Corporation, Atmos constructed and operated pipelines under three easements from the ‘50’s and ‘60’s and the parties had a 2012 Roadway Lease granting Atmos a 40 foot roadway lease, which expired under his own terms in 2015.
The merger doctrine
Continue Reading Smart Pig Technology … and the Texas Merger Doctrine
Email is the way we communicate these days. Whether emails create a contract is important if you’re thinking nothing short of scribblings on a piece of old parchment could ever bind anybody or, to the contrary, your goal is to establish an enforceable agreement. Before hitting “send”, consider Bujnoch v. Copano. Questions of fact precluded a summary judgment denying an agreement. A jury will decide the question.
Continue Reading Can Emails Establish an Easement in Texas?
In Re Louisiana Crawfish Producers arises out of the collision between two of Louisiana’s favored enterprises: crawfish and hydrocarbons.
Takeaways
There is lots of legalese, of interest primarily to lawyers who practice in federal court. So, we’ll start with a few things to remember:
Co-author Lydia Webb
One of the hottest issues from 2016 was whether an E&P debtor can reject, under section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, an above-market midstream contract. Given the potential for a “no-win” situation, in all but one case where the issue arose E&P debtors and midstream companies were able to settle, often by