In Self v. BPX Operating, a case with significant implications for Louisiana operators and royalty owners, the Supreme Court of Louisiana ruled that the doctrine of negotiorum gestio in La. Civil Code art. 2292 does not allow the operator of a drilling unit created by Louisiana’s conversation laws to withhold post-production expenses (PPCs) from
Co author Kelley Clark MorrisSamson Expl., LLC et al v. Moak considered the duties owed by a unit operator to an unleased mineral interest owner in tracts within the unit but on which no well is drilled or completed.
Continue Reading Examining a Unit Operator’s Duties to an Unleased Mineral Owner
Co-author Ethan WoodIn Johnson et al vs. Chesapeake et al, unit operator Chesapeake deducted post-production costs (gathering, compression, treatment, processing, transportation and dehydration) from non-operating, unleased mineral owners’ share of production proceeds. The UMO’s (so-called by the court) sued. The federal district court concluded that La. R.S. 30:10(A)(3) governs the dispute, and post-production costs could not be recovered from the UMO’s share of production proceeds.
Continue Reading Louisiana Operator Can’t Deduct Post-Production Costs from Unleased Mineral Owners
If you’ve ever tried to escape penalties for the operator/producer’s failure to comply with La. R.S §30:103.1 and §103.2, take comfort in XXI Oil & Gas, LLC v. Hilcorp Energy Company. You are not alone. No excuse has satisfied the courts, and there is none here.
The statutes (links above) require information