A court case in which a landowner in Ohio sued to cancel a lease because the driller and the company that owns the lease have not paid any royalties since drilling. The Fifth Appellate District Court of Ohio found that because a specific provision in the original lease does not provide for cancellation due to non-payment of royalties, the landowners will have to continue to get screwed.
The decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. EQT had leased land from Alex Cooper, et al with an initial five-year term. The lease provided for a five-year extension. It also required EQT to drill at least one well on/under the property during the first five-year lease. EQT failed to drill a well in the first term but instead elected to extend the lease for an additional five years. The federal judge found that EQT has the right to extend the lease even if they didn't drill a well during the first term.
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Pollock v Energy Corporation of A...Marcellus Drilling News
On Monday, October 24, 2016, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that ECA did not meet its burden of proving its need for a new trial in the case involving a $1.1 million judgment to landowners. The landowners sued ECA in federal court in 2010, alleging they did not receive their proper amount of royalties under their leases because allegedly improper post-production costs were deducted. The District Court jury awarded $1.1 million in damages. ECA appealed the verdict to the Third Circuit.
Loughman v EQT - Decision Rejecting Landowner Request to Sever Production Lea...Marcellus Drilling News
A case in which a Greene County, PA landowner requested the court sever production rights under a lease from storage right. The landowners say EQT never produced oil/gas from the property, and lack of production cancels that portion of the lease. PA Superior Court said no, the two are together in the same lease and one OR the other is enough to keep the lease enforceable.
The official motion filed with the New York State Court of Appeals, NY's highest court, to hear the case of Norse Energy v Town of Dryden over the town's vote to ban all fracking and drilling throughout the township.
A case heard by the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Ohio in which a landowner claimed that the relatively little drilling done on a small portion of their land should allow them to reclaim title to the mineral rights and release the unused portions of the land to another driller. The court disagreed, ruling the language in the lease does not allow it.
PA Superior Court Ruling in Patricia Wright v. Misty Mountain, LLC and Shirle...Marcellus Drilling News
A ruling in an important mineral rights case in Pennsylvania, stemming from the sale of land, but not the oil and gas mineral rights, in 1950 in Bradford County, PA. The court upheld a decision that that the original mineral rights holder retained those rights even after a lease for those rights had expired.
The decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. EQT had leased land from Alex Cooper, et al with an initial five-year term. The lease provided for a five-year extension. It also required EQT to drill at least one well on/under the property during the first five-year lease. EQT failed to drill a well in the first term but instead elected to extend the lease for an additional five years. The federal judge found that EQT has the right to extend the lease even if they didn't drill a well during the first term.
US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit - Pollock v Energy Corporation of A...Marcellus Drilling News
On Monday, October 24, 2016, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals found that ECA did not meet its burden of proving its need for a new trial in the case involving a $1.1 million judgment to landowners. The landowners sued ECA in federal court in 2010, alleging they did not receive their proper amount of royalties under their leases because allegedly improper post-production costs were deducted. The District Court jury awarded $1.1 million in damages. ECA appealed the verdict to the Third Circuit.
Loughman v EQT - Decision Rejecting Landowner Request to Sever Production Lea...Marcellus Drilling News
A case in which a Greene County, PA landowner requested the court sever production rights under a lease from storage right. The landowners say EQT never produced oil/gas from the property, and lack of production cancels that portion of the lease. PA Superior Court said no, the two are together in the same lease and one OR the other is enough to keep the lease enforceable.
The official motion filed with the New York State Court of Appeals, NY's highest court, to hear the case of Norse Energy v Town of Dryden over the town's vote to ban all fracking and drilling throughout the township.
A case heard by the Fifth District Court of Appeals in Ohio in which a landowner claimed that the relatively little drilling done on a small portion of their land should allow them to reclaim title to the mineral rights and release the unused portions of the land to another driller. The court disagreed, ruling the language in the lease does not allow it.
PA Superior Court Ruling in Patricia Wright v. Misty Mountain, LLC and Shirle...Marcellus Drilling News
A ruling in an important mineral rights case in Pennsylvania, stemming from the sale of land, but not the oil and gas mineral rights, in 1950 in Bradford County, PA. The court upheld a decision that that the original mineral rights holder retained those rights even after a lease for those rights had expired.
The Ohio Supreme Court was asked to decide whether Ohio follows the "at the well" rule, which permits the deduction of post-production costs from landowner royalty checks, or if the state follows the "marketable product" rule, which limits the deduction of post-production costs under certain circumstances. The court ruled saying in so many words, "We're not deciding." In other words, each royalty case should be litigated individually, case-by-case, in a trial court.
An Ohio landowner whose land Sunoco Logistics Partners wants to traverse with the Mariner East 2 pipeline tried a novel legal argument. The landowner's attorneys argued in the Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals that pure propane and pure butane--both of which would be transported through the pipeline from eastern Ohio all the way to the Marcus Hook refinery near Philadelphia--are not "petroleum." At least, not petroleum for the purposes of the permit which grants Sunoco the right to build the pipeline to transport petroleum products. The Court of Appeals justices rejected that argument and said, in essence, that propane and butane fit under the definition of petroleum as that word has been used for generations. This is the court's ruling.
OH 7th District Court of Appeals Decision in Hupp v. Beck Energy CorpMarcellus Drilling News
The Seventh District Court of Appeals in Ohio overturned a lower court ruling and ruled in favor of Beck Energy Corp and XTO Energy, a major victory for the drillers and major defeat for the landowners in Monroe and Belmont counties who say their land never got drilled and they wanted to re-sign with another company.
Motion before the Federal Court;
Bill of Costs as award of the Federal Court of Canada to the Right Honorable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi who won a case against three Crown lawyer
File T-1020-07
FLSA Litigation - Federal Court - MDFL Tampa - Fee Entitlement & MootnessPollard PLLC
Lawyers in FLSA cases and particularly on the defense side should view this as a cautionary tale: Tendering a check for the wages at issue does not moot the plaintiff's claim. FLSA claims are live until there is a judgment or a settlement approved by the court. And plaintiffs DO get their fees for litigating over the issue of attorneys' fees.
Simply put: A legitimate FLSA case, a skilled attorney on the plaintiff side, and defense counsel who do not understand the applicable legal framework make for disastrous results.
WV Supreme Court Decision Disallowing Surface Rights Owners to Appeal Drillin...Marcellus Drilling News
The decision issued Nov 21, 2012 by the West Virginia Supreme Court in case #11-1157 - James Martin, et al. v. Matthew L. Hamblet. The ruling says that surface rights landowners may not appeal permit decisions by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection on the location of drilling pads by mineral rights owners and their representatives (drilling companies). Surface rights owners would like a say in where drilling will happen on their property--and just compensation for the land taken.
Court Order Granting Certification of Demchak Royalty Class Action Lawsuit Se...Marcellus Drilling News
The court order that certifies the class action status of the "Demchak" royalty case in Pennsylvania against Chesapeake Energy. PA landowners sued Chesapeake Energy for shorting them on royalty payments using a technique of inflating post-production prices. This order allows the settlement to proceed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Oct 9, 2015 issued a stay on the odious and overreaching Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/Army Corps of Engineers' (ECA) so-called update that redefines Waters of the United States (WOTUS) to include just about everything, including mud puddles. Some 13 states sued to stop the new rule. This action keeps the rule from being adopted in any of the 50 states until a lawsuit, brought by the 13 states, has a chance of playing out in court.
The Ohio Supreme Court was asked to decide whether Ohio follows the "at the well" rule, which permits the deduction of post-production costs from landowner royalty checks, or if the state follows the "marketable product" rule, which limits the deduction of post-production costs under certain circumstances. The court ruled saying in so many words, "We're not deciding." In other words, each royalty case should be litigated individually, case-by-case, in a trial court.
An Ohio landowner whose land Sunoco Logistics Partners wants to traverse with the Mariner East 2 pipeline tried a novel legal argument. The landowner's attorneys argued in the Ohio Seventh District Court of Appeals that pure propane and pure butane--both of which would be transported through the pipeline from eastern Ohio all the way to the Marcus Hook refinery near Philadelphia--are not "petroleum." At least, not petroleum for the purposes of the permit which grants Sunoco the right to build the pipeline to transport petroleum products. The Court of Appeals justices rejected that argument and said, in essence, that propane and butane fit under the definition of petroleum as that word has been used for generations. This is the court's ruling.
OH 7th District Court of Appeals Decision in Hupp v. Beck Energy CorpMarcellus Drilling News
The Seventh District Court of Appeals in Ohio overturned a lower court ruling and ruled in favor of Beck Energy Corp and XTO Energy, a major victory for the drillers and major defeat for the landowners in Monroe and Belmont counties who say their land never got drilled and they wanted to re-sign with another company.
Motion before the Federal Court;
Bill of Costs as award of the Federal Court of Canada to the Right Honorable Major Keyvan Nourhaghighi who won a case against three Crown lawyer
File T-1020-07
FLSA Litigation - Federal Court - MDFL Tampa - Fee Entitlement & MootnessPollard PLLC
Lawyers in FLSA cases and particularly on the defense side should view this as a cautionary tale: Tendering a check for the wages at issue does not moot the plaintiff's claim. FLSA claims are live until there is a judgment or a settlement approved by the court. And plaintiffs DO get their fees for litigating over the issue of attorneys' fees.
Simply put: A legitimate FLSA case, a skilled attorney on the plaintiff side, and defense counsel who do not understand the applicable legal framework make for disastrous results.
WV Supreme Court Decision Disallowing Surface Rights Owners to Appeal Drillin...Marcellus Drilling News
The decision issued Nov 21, 2012 by the West Virginia Supreme Court in case #11-1157 - James Martin, et al. v. Matthew L. Hamblet. The ruling says that surface rights landowners may not appeal permit decisions by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection on the location of drilling pads by mineral rights owners and their representatives (drilling companies). Surface rights owners would like a say in where drilling will happen on their property--and just compensation for the land taken.
Court Order Granting Certification of Demchak Royalty Class Action Lawsuit Se...Marcellus Drilling News
The court order that certifies the class action status of the "Demchak" royalty case in Pennsylvania against Chesapeake Energy. PA landowners sued Chesapeake Energy for shorting them on royalty payments using a technique of inflating post-production prices. This order allows the settlement to proceed.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Oct 9, 2015 issued a stay on the odious and overreaching Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)/Army Corps of Engineers' (ECA) so-called update that redefines Waters of the United States (WOTUS) to include just about everything, including mud puddles. Some 13 states sued to stop the new rule. This action keeps the rule from being adopted in any of the 50 states until a lawsuit, brought by the 13 states, has a chance of playing out in court.
On August 3, 2015, President Obama and EPA announced the Clean Power Plan – a historic and important step in reducing carbon pollution from power plants that takes real action on climate change. Shaped by years of unprecedented outreach and public engagement, the final Clean Power Plan is fair, flexible and designed to strengthen the fast-growing trend toward cleaner and lower-polluting American energy. This plan will cause electricity rates to spike higher than they have ever been and will lead to the elimination of Constitutional freedoms in the United States. It must be dumped.
Decision by U.S. District Judge David N. Hurd on Force Majeure Case in New Yo...Marcellus Drilling News
A decision issued by Judge David Hurd in a case of landowners from Broome and Tioga Counties in New York State against Chesapeake Energy and Statoilhydro. Chesapeake is attempting to extend leases on property for gas drilling claiming that the moratorium in New York has stopped them from drilling. Landowners claim the leases were signed long before horizontal hydraulic fracturing of shale was done and that Chesapeake could have drilled, conventionally, any time they chose to.
Sycamore Vista Homeowner's Association Responds666isMONEY, Lc
it's not actually the HOA's attorney responding but two (yes, two) lawyers from Russo's office. I have yet to write about who Steve Russo is but will say this now: They have no web page! rss-law.com How do they stay in business?
Federal Judge Rules Against Small Haulers in Waste Management DisputeThis Is Reno
Reno's small waste haulers were dealt a blow this week in their ongoing dispute against the City of Reno and Waste Management. Green Solutions Recycling filed suit against the city and Reno Disposal (Waste Management) over the city's enforcement of its franchise agreement with Waste Management.
RK Associates, Raanan Katz Were Alleged In Unlawful Ejectment In Miamirkcenters
Defendants do not dispute, that security guards threw Plaintiffs off the property and that RK Associates and MWI changed the locks on the bank branch's office doors. Furthermore, Plaintiffs allege conversion of their remaining personal property by RK Associates and MWI after they were escorted from the premises. Judging from the record, the Court finds that there is a possibility that Plaintiffs can establish a cause of action against the resident defendant. Triggs, 154 F.3d at 1287. At the very least, Plaintiffs have a possibility of stating a viable cause of action against the landlord RK Associates for conversion of their equipment and for unlawful ejectment. Defendants themselves note that joinder is deemed legitimate when such possibility exists.
The Ohio Supreme Court decision in a case that started with three landowners and was later turned into a class action. The case claimed that landowner leases with Beck Energy Corp. were void and should be terminated because Beck never drilled wells on their property and that a provision allowing Beck to pay a nominal delay fee was against public policy. A lower court agreed, but it was overturned by an appeals court and now, the appeals court decision stands as ruled by the Supreme Court.
San Diego attorney Scott McMillan sued Darren Chaker to remove public records about McMillan's being named in a child molestation investigation. The report is contained as an exhibit in San Diego Superior Court Case No. 37-2017-00036344-CU-NP-CTL and can also be seen on this profile.
Nonetheless, Scott McMillan San Diego attorney suffered a miserable loss in San Diego federal court, then appealed the loss to the Ninth Circuit. San Diego attorney Scott McMillan also filed an identical lawsuit in San Diego Superior Court, Case No. 37-2017-00036344-CU-NP-CTL. As expected, the Ninth Circuit found the lawsuit against Darren Chaker was meritless.
Now, San Diego attorney Scott McMillan is facing two anti-SLAPP motions in San Diego Superior Court and of course the inevitable embarrassment of losing his case, which is almost as bad as Scott McMillan having been sued twice recently for fraud and legal malpractice.
Decision in case where landowners claimed because the driller did not pay annual rent payments (for non-drilling) in a timely manner, it released them from the lease. The PA Superior Court disagreed and found for the drillers.
An important Dormant Minerals Right Act (DMA) case before the Ohio Supreme Court. The Court held that under the DMA: (1) a recorded oil and gas lease is a title transaction that serves as a savings event that prevents minerals from being abandoned to a surface owner; but (2) that the unrecorded expiration of an oil and gas lease is not a savings event.
Amici Curiae brief by BP America, Devon Energy, EOG Resources, EXCO Resources, Shell Western, Trinity River Energy, Unit Corporation and XTO Energy, filed in Chesapeake Exploration, LLC, et al. v. Hyder, et al., Case 14-0302 (Tex. 2015).
Anderson energy Corporation v. Dominion Oklahoma Texas Exploration & Production, Inc., et al., No. 04-14-00170-CV, In the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas
Quarterly legislative action update: Marcellus and Utica shale region (4Q16)Marcellus Drilling News
A quarterly update from the legal beagles at global law firm Norton Rose Fulbright. A quarterly legislative action update for the second quarter of 2016 looking at previously laws acted upon, and new laws introduced, affecting the oil and gas industry in Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia.
An update from Spectra Energy on their proposed $3 billion project to connect four existing pipeline systems to flow more Marcellus/Utica gas to New England. In short, Spectra has put the project on pause until mid-2017 while it attempts to get new customers signed.
A letter from Rover Pipeline to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission requesting the agency issue the final certificate that will allow Rover to begin tree-clearing and construction of the 511-mile pipeline through Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and Michigan. If the certificate is delayed beyond the end of 2016, it will delay the project an extra year due to tree-clearing restrictions (to accommodate federally-protected bats).
DOE Order Granting Elba Island LNG Right to Export to Non-FTA CountriesMarcellus Drilling News
An order issued by the U.S. Dept. of Energy that allows the Elba Island LNG export facility to export LNG to countries with no free trade agreement with the U.S. Countries like Japan and India have no FTA with our country (i.e. friendly countries)--so this is good news indeed. Although the facility would have operated by sending LNG to FTA countries, this order opens the market much wider.
A study released in December 2016 by the London School of Economics, titled "On the Comparative Advantage of U.S. Manufacturing: Evidence from the Shale Gas Revolution." While America has enough shale gas to export plenty of it, exporting it is not as economic as exporting oil due to the elaborate processes to liquefy and regassify natural gas--therefore a lot of the gas stays right here at home, making the U.S. one of (if not the) cheapest places on the planet to establish manufacturing plants, especially for manufacturers that use natural gas and NGLs (natural gas liquids). Therefore, manufacturing, especially in the petrochemical sector, is ramping back up in the U.S. For every two jobs created by fracking, another one job is created in the manufacturing sector.
Letter From 24 States Asking Trump & Congress to Withdraw the Unlawful Clean ...Marcellus Drilling News
A letter from the attorneys general from 24 of the states opposed to the Obama Clean Power Plan to President-Elect Trump, RINO Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnel and RINO House Speaker Paul Ryan. The letter asks Trump to dump the CPP on Day One when he takes office, and asks Congress to adopt legislation to prevent the EPA from such an egregious overreach ever again.
Report: New U.S. Power Costs: by County, with Environmental ExternalitiesMarcellus Drilling News
Natural gas and wind are the lowest-cost technology options for new electricity generation across much of the U.S. when cost, public health impacts and environmental effects are considered. So says this new research paper released by The University of Texas at Austin. Researchers assessed multiple generation technologies including coal, natural gas, solar, wind and nuclear. Their findings are depicted in a series of maps illustrating the cost of each generation technology on a county-by-county basis throughout the U.S.
Annual report issued by the U.S. Energy Information Administration showing oil and natural gas proved reserves, in this case for 2015. These reports are issued almost a year after the period for which they report. This report shows proved reserves for natural gas dropped by 64.5 trillion cubic feet (Tcf), or 16.6%. U.S. crude oil and lease condensate proved reserves also decreased--from 39.9 billion barrels to 35.2 billion barrels (down 11.8%) in 2015. Proved reserves are calculated on a number of factors, including price.
The monthly tabulation and prediction from the U.S. Energy Information Administration on production and activity in the largest 7 U.S. shale plays. All 7 shale plays will experience a decrease in natural gas production from the previous month due to low commodity prices.
Velocys is the manufacturer of gas-to-liquids (GTL) plants that convert natural gas (a hyrdocarbon) into other hydrocarbons, like diesel fuel, gasoline, and even waxes. This PowerPoint presentation lays out the Velocys plan to get the company growing. GTL plants have not (so far) taken off in the U.S. Velocys hopes to change that. They specialize in small GTL plants.
PA DEP Revised Permit for Natural Gas Compression Stations, Processing Plants...Marcellus Drilling News
In January 2016, Gov. Wolf announced the DEP would revise its current general permit (GP-5) to update the permitting requirements for sources at natural gas compression, processing, and transmission facilities. This is the revised GP-5.
PA DEP Permit for Unconventional NatGas Well Site Operations and Remote Piggi...Marcellus Drilling News
In January 2016, PA Gov. Wolf announced the Dept. of Environmental Protection would develop a general permit for sources at new or modified unconventional well sites and remote pigging stations (GP-5A). This is the proposed permit.
Onerous new regulations for the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale industry proposed by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection. The new regs will, according to the DEP, help PA reduce so-called fugitive methane emissions and some types of air pollution (VOCs). This is liberal Gov. Tom Wolf's way of addressing mythical man-made global warming.
The monthly Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO) from the U.S. Energy Information Administration for December 2016. This issue makes a couple of key points re natural gas: (1) EIA predicts that natural gas production in the U.S. for 2016 will see a healthy decline over 2015 levels--1.3 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) less in 2016. That's the first annual production decline since 2005! (2) The EIA predicts the average price for natural gas at the benchmark Henry Hub will climb from $2.49/Mcf (thousand cubic feet) in 2016 to a whopping $3.27/Mcf in 2017. Why the jump? Growing domestic natural gas consumption, along with higher pipeline exports to Mexico and liquefied natural gas exports.
A sort of "year in review" for the gas industry in the northeast. If you could boil it all down, the word that appears prominently throughout is "delay" with respect to important natgas pipeline projects. From the Constitution, which should have already been built by now, to smaller projects, delays were the prominent trend for 2016.
The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission responded to each point raised in a draft copy of the PA Auditor General's audit of how Act 13 impact fee money, raised from Marcellus Shale drillers, gets spent by local municipalities. The PUC says it's not their job to monitor how the money gets spent, only in how much is raised and distributed.
Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission Act 13/Impact Fees Audit by PA Auditor...Marcellus Drilling News
A biased look at how 60% of impact fees raised from PA's shale drilling are spent, by the anti-drilling PA Auditor General. He chose to ignore an audit of 40% of the impact fees, which go to Harrisburg and disappear into the black hole of Harrisburg spending. The Auditor General claims, without basis in fact, that up to 24% of the funds are spent on items not allowed under the Act 13 law.
The final report from the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection that finds, after several years of testing, no elevated levels of radiation from acid mine drainage coming from the Clyde Mine, flowing into Ten Mile Creek. Radical anti-drillers tried to smear the Marcellus industry with false claims of illegal wastewater dumping into the mine, with further claims of elevated radiation levels in the creek. After years of testing, the DEP found those allegations to be false.
FERC Order Denying Stay of Kinder Morgan's Broad Run Expansion ProjectMarcellus Drilling News
Several anti-drillers filed an appeal of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Certificate for the Kinder Morgan Broad Run Expansion Project, asking for a stay claiming a removal of 40 acres of forest for a compressor station would irreparably harm Mom Earth. FERC has ruled against the stay and told the antis Mom Earth will be just fine.
04062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
‘वोटर्स विल मस्ट प्रीवेल’ (मतदाताओं को जीतना होगा) अभियान द्वारा जारी हेल्पलाइन नंबर, 4 जून को सुबह 7 बजे से दोपहर 12 बजे तक मतगणना प्रक्रिया में कहीं भी किसी भी तरह के उल्लंघन की रिपोर्ट करने के लिए खुला रहेगा।
Here is Gabe Whitley's response to my defamation lawsuit for him calling me a rapist and perjurer in court documents.
You have to read it to believe it, but after you read it, you won't believe it. And I included eight examples of defamatory statements/
El Puerto de Algeciras continúa un año más como el más eficiente del continente europeo y vuelve a situarse en el “top ten” mundial, según el informe The Container Port Performance Index 2023 (CPPI), elaborado por el Banco Mundial y la consultora S&P Global.
El informe CPPI utiliza dos enfoques metodológicos diferentes para calcular la clasificación del índice: uno administrativo o técnico y otro estadístico, basado en análisis factorial (FA). Según los autores, esta dualidad pretende asegurar una clasificación que refleje con precisión el rendimiento real del puerto, a la vez que sea estadísticamente sólida. En esta edición del informe CPPI 2023, se han empleado los mismos enfoques metodológicos y se ha aplicado un método de agregación de clasificaciones para combinar los resultados de ambos enfoques y obtener una clasificación agregada.
An astonishing, first-of-its-kind, report by the NYT assessing damage in Ukraine. Even if the war ends tomorrow, in many places there will be nothing to go back to.
Acolyte Episodes review (TV series) The Acolyte. Learn about the influence of the program on the Star Wars world, as well as new characters and story twists.
03062024_First India Newspaper Jaipur.pdfFIRST INDIA
Find Latest India News and Breaking News these days from India on Politics, Business, Entertainment, Technology, Sports, Lifestyle and Coronavirus News in India and the world over that you can't miss. For real time update Visit our social media handle. Read First India NewsPaper in your morning replace. Visit First India.
CLICK:- https://firstindia.co.in/
#First_India_NewsPaper
Armstrong v. Chesapeake Exploration Court Decision
1. [Cite as Armstrong v. Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C., 2015-Ohio-3310.]
COURT OF APPEALS
TUSCARAWAS COUNTY, OHIO
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
MYRON ARMSTRONG, et al.
Plaintiffs-Appellants
-vs-
CHESAPEAKE EXPLORATION, L.L.C.,
et al.
Defendants-Appellees
JUDGES:
Hon. William B. Hoffman, P. J.
Hon. Sheila G. Farmer, J.
Hon. John W. Wise, J.
Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056
O P I N I O N
CHARACTER OF PROCEEDING: Civil Appeal from the Court of Common
Pleas, Case No 2014 CV 08 0472
JUDGMENT: Affirmed
DATE OF JUDGMENT ENTRY: August 14, 21015
APPEARANCES:
For Plaintiffs-Appellants For Defendants-Appellees
DAVID R. HUDSON TIMOTHY B. McGRANOR
REMINGER CO, LPA JONATHAN P. CORWIN
One SeaGate, Suite 1600 SEAN M. KOHL
Toledo, Ohio 43604 VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR and PEASE
52 East Gay Street
GREGORY D. BRUNTON Post Office Box 1008
DANIEL J. HYZAK Columbus, Ohio 43216-1008
REMINGER CO., LPA
65 East State Street, 4th
Floor
Columbus, Ohio 43215
2. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 2
Wise, J.
{¶1} Plaintiffs-Apellants Myron and Nikki Armstrong appeal the December 1,
2014, Judgment Entry entered by the Tuscarawas County Court of Common Pleas,
granting the motion to dismiss filed by Appellees Chesapeake Exploration, LLC,
EnerVest Operating, LLC and Belden & Blake Corporation.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND FACTS
{¶2} The relevant facts are as follows:
{¶3} On February 5, 2003, Plaintiffs-Appellants Myron and Nikki Armstrong
became the owners of approximately 61 acres of real property located in Tuscarawas
County, Ohio ("Property"). Complaint at ¶¶ 7-8, 20. When the Armstrongs acquired the
Property, it was encumbered by an oil and gas lease ("Lease") entered into on July 11,
1972, by and between Delbert C. Edwards and Peggy Edwards as lessors and Stocker
& Sitler Leasehold Corporation as lessee. Id. at ¶ 9.
{¶4} Under the terms of the Lease, the owner of the Armstrong Property was
required to notify the lessor of any change in ownership of the property. Id. at ¶12.
Additionally, among other things, the express terms of the Lease required that a 1/8
royalty be paid by the lessee for all oil and/or gas produced from the unitized property.
Id. at ¶13.
{¶5} Following the execution of the Lease, the Armstrong Property was unitized
with surrounding property to create a drilling unit. Id. at ¶ 14. An oil and/or gas well was
drilled on one of the properties within the drilling unit; however, no oil and/or gas well
has ever been drilled on the Armstrong Property. Id.
3. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 3
{¶6} Prior to Appellants obtaining ownership of the Armstrong Property, the
Lease was assigned to Appellee Belden & Blake. Id. at ¶12.
{¶7} According to Appellants, upon purchase the Property, they promptly
provided notice of the change in ownership as required under the terms of the Lease.
Id. Appellants maintain that Appellees have failed to pay any of the required royalty
payments due and owing to Appellants throughout their entire ownership of the
Armstrong Property. Id. at ¶15.
{¶8} On August 4, 2014, Plaintiffs-Appellants, Myron Armstrong and Nikki
Armstrong, filed an action seeking the cancellation of the oil and gas lease executed on
July 11, 1972, for breach of its express terms.1
{¶9} On October 1, 2014, Defendants-Appellees, Chesapeake Exploration,
LLC., EnerVest Operating, LLC. and Belden & Blake Corporation filed a Motion to
Dismiss, pursuant to Civ.R. 12(B)(6), for failure to state a claim upon which relief could
be granted.
{¶10} On December 1, 2014, the trial court granted Appellees' Motion to
Dismiss.
{¶11} It is from this judgment entry Appellants appeal, raising the following
assignment of error:
ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR
{¶12} “I. WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN GRANTING APPELLEES'
MOTION TO DISMISS.”
1
Appellants’ Complaint contains four separate causes of action: Count I: Breach of
Express Terms, Count II: Quiet Title, Count III: Declaratory Judgment, Count IV:
Slander of Title.
4. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 4
I.
{¶13} In their sole Assignment of Error, Appellants contend the trial court erred
in granting Appellees’ motion to dismiss. We disagree.
{¶14} In considering a motion to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(6), a court must
consider only the facts alleged in the complaint and any material incorporated into it.
State ex rel. Crabtree v. Franklin County Bd. of Health, 77 Ohio St.3d 247, 249, 673
N.E.2d 1281 (1997). For purposes of the Rule, the trial court must presume all facts
alleged in the complaint are true and it must draw all reasonable inferences in favor of
the non-moving party. Mitchell v. Lawson Milk Co., 40 Ohio St.3d 190, 192, 532 N.E.2d
753 (1988). A court may not dismiss a complaint for failure to state a claim unless it
appears beyond doubt that plaintiff can prove no set of facts warranting a recovery.” Id.
If there is a set of facts, consistent with the plaintiff's complaint, which would allow the
plaintiff to recover, the court may not grant the motion to dismiss. York v. Ohio State
Highway Patrol, 60 Ohio St.3d 143, 145, 573 N.E.2d 1063 (1991). Dismissal is proper if
the complaint fails to sufficiently allege an essential element of the cause of action.
State ex rel. Cincinnati Enquirer v. Ronan, 124 Ohio St.3d 17, 2009–Ohio–5947, 918
N.E.2d 515, at ¶ 7–8. However, because of the notice pleading requirements of the
Ohio Rules of Civil Procedure, “a plaintiff is not required to prove his or her case at the
pleading stage. Very often, the evidence necessary for a plaintiff to prevail is not
obtained until [he] is able to discover materials in the defendant's possession.” Id.
{¶15} This Court reviews an order granting a Civil Rule 12(B)(6) motion to
dismiss de novo. Perrysburg Twp. v. City of Rossford, 103 Ohio St.3d 79, 2004–Ohio–
4362, 814 N.E.2d 44, at ¶ 5.
5. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 5
{¶16} In their Complaint, Appellants aver that Appellees' failure to pay royalty
payments is a violation of the express terms of the Lease and that as a result of the
period of non-payment “any extension of the primary term of the lease has lapsed as a
matter of law and the Lease has terminated.” Complaint at ¶ 16. A copy of the oil and
gas lease was attached to Appellants’ Complaint as Exhibit A.
{¶17} This case involves the interpretation of a written contract, which is a
matter of law that we review de novo. Arnott v. Arnott, 132 Ohio St.3d 401, 2012-Ohio-
3208, 972 N.E.2d 586, ¶ 14, quoting Saunders v. Mortensen, 101 Ohio St.3d 86, 2004-
Ohio-24, 801 N.E.2d 452, (“ ‘[t]he construction of a written contract is a matter of law
that we review de novo’ ”). “Our role is to ascertain and give effect to the intent of the
parties, which is presumed to lie in the contract language.” Boone Coleman Constr., Inc.
v. Piketon, 2014-Ohio-2377, 13 N.E.3d 1190, ¶ 18 (4th Dist.), citing Arnott at ¶ 14.
“Common words appearing in a written instrument will be given their ordinary meaning
unless manifest absurdity results, or unless some other meaning is clearly evidenced
from the face or overall contents of the instrument.” Alexander v. Buckeye Pipe Line
Co., 53 Ohio St.2d 241, 374 N.E.2d 146 (1978), paragraph two of the syllabus,
superseded by statute on other grounds; Harding v. Viking Internatl. Resources Co.,
Inc., 2013-Ohio-5236, 1 N.E.3d 872, ¶ 12 (4th Dist.).
{¶18} More specifically, “[t]he rights and remedies of the parties to an oil or gas
lease must be determined by the terms of the written instrument” and “[s]uch leases are
contracts, and the terms of the contract with the law applicable to such terms must
govern the rights and remedies of the parties.” Harris v. Ohio Oil Co., 57 Ohio St. 118,
129, 48 N.E. 502 (1897); Harding at ¶11.
6. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 6
{¶19} The oil and gas lease in this case does not contain an express provision
empowering the lessor or royalty owner to declare a forfeiture thereof for the
nonpayment of oil and gas royalties from production.
{¶20} Absent specific language in the lease, nonpayment of royalties is not
grounds for cancellation of an oil and gas lease. Blausey v. Stein, 6th Dis. Ottawa No.
OT-78-3, 1978 WL 214959, (Dec. 8, 1978), aff’d, 61 Ohio St.2d 264 (1980); Cannon v.
Cassidy (Okla. 1975), 542 P. 2d 514; Kelly v. Ivyton Oil and Gas Co. (1924), 204 Ky.
804, 265 S.W. 309; (An oil and gas lease binding the lessee to drill a well on the leased
premises within a certain period or in lieu thereof make periodical payments of rental or
delay money, and containing no clause of forfeiture, is not forfeited merely by
nonpayment of the rental. It can be terminated only by surrender, abandonment, or
expiration of the term.) Pure Oil Co. v. Sturm, 43 Ohio App. 105, (5th Dist. 1930) citing
Reserve Gas Co. v. Carbon Black Mfg. Co., 72 W. Va. 757, 79 S. E. 1002. Other
authorities, holding that a failure to pay deferred rentals on the stipulated date, where
there is no forfeiture clause in the lease, will not work a forfeiture thereof, are cited as
follows: Thornton, Oil and Gas, vol. 1, 881 § 180; Smith v. People's Natural Gas Co.,
257 Pa. 396, 101 A. 739; Jackson v. Twin State Oil Co., 95 Okl. 96, 218 P. 324; Harris
v. Ohio Oil Co., 57 Ohio St. 118, 48 N. E. 502; Wilson v. Pernell, 199 Ky. 218, 250 S. W.
850; Kies v. Williams, 190 Ky. 596, 228 S. W. 40; Pryor Mountain Oil & Gas Co. v.
Cross, 31 Wyo. 9, 222 P. 570; Decker v. Kirlicks, 110 Tex. 90, 216 S. W. 385;
McCallister v. Texas Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 223 S. W. 859; Smith v. Root, 66 W. Va. 633,
66 S. E. 1095, 30 L. R. A. (N. S.) 176; Castle Brook Carbon Black Co. v. Ferrell, 76 W.
Va. 300, 85 S. E. 544; Davis v. Chautauqua Oil & Gas Co., 78 Kan. 97, 96 P. 47;
7. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 7
Barnhart v. Lockwood, 152 Pa. 82, 25 A. 237; Chandler v. Hart, 161 Cal. 405, 119 P.
516; Ann. Cas. 1913B, 1094.
{¶21} In a recent case involving the issue of forfeiture of an oil and gas lease for
failure to pay minimum royalty payments, the Fourth District Court of Appeals in Sims v.
Anderson, Washington No. 14CA31, 2015-Ohio-2727,2
stated:
We explained the distinction between leases with forfeiture clauses
and those without in Black Diamond Coal at *3 (emphasis added):
A principle argument advanced by appellants in asserting summary
judgment was improper is that the failure to pay royalties, absent a
forfeiture clause in the lease so providing, gives rise only to an action
for damages and not cancellation. This, indeed, is the general rule. The
following is stated by the Supreme Court of Arkansas in Schaffer v.
Tenneco Oil Company (1983), 278 Ark. 511, 647 S.W.2d 446 at 447:
The appellants concede that Louisiana is the only
jurisdiction that has consistently been willing to decree
cancellation for a lessee's unexcused failure to pay pursuant
to an oil and gas lease. The majority view was expressed by
the Supreme Court of Oklahoma in Wagoner Oil & Gas Co.
v. Marlow, 137 Okl. 116, 278 P. 294 (1929): “Failure to pay
royalty or for injury to the land as provided by the lease will
not give the lessors sufficient grounds to declare a forfeiture,
unless by the express terms of the lease they are given
2
In Sims v. Anderson, the lease contained an express forfeiture clause distinguishing it
from this case and from those cases cited above.
8. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 8
that right and power.” To the same effect is Cannon v.
Cassidy, 542 P.2d 514 (Okl.1975). Summers, The Law of Oil
and Gas, Vol. 3A (1958), § 616.
{¶22} Appellants do not dispute the general rule as set forth above, but instead
argue that the trial court should have applied the exception set forth in the case of Black
Diamond Coal Co. v. Buckeye Petroleum Co., 4th Dist. CA-1271.
{¶23} Upon review, we find Appellants’ reliance on Black Diamond Coal is
misplaced. Black Diamond involved a case where the lessor had previously obtained a
monetary judgment against the lessee which remained unpaid. Under this limited set of
circumstances, the court held that such failure to satisfy the monetary judgment
warranted cancellation of the lease because legal remedies had proven to be
inadequate.
{¶24} Specifically, the court in Black Diamond held:
{¶25} “Where legal remedies are inadequate, forfeiture or cancellation of an oil
and gas lease, in whole or in part, is an appropriate remedy for a lessee's violation of an
implied covenant.”
{¶26} In the case sub judice, Appellants have never brought an action seeking a
monetary judgment for the unpaid royalties. Appellants would then need so show that
such judgment cannot or will not be satisfied by Appellees.
{¶27} Appellants, on appeal, also argue that violations of the implied covenants
of good faith and fair dealing allow for the forfeiture of the Lease. However, upon review
we find that Appellants did not assert this claim in their Complaint or raise this argument
before trial court. It is well established that a party cannot raise any new issues or legal
9. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 9
theories for the first time on appeal." Dolan v. Dolan, 11th Dist. Nos. 2000-T-0154 and
2001-T-0003, 2002-Ohio-2440, at ¶ 7, citing Stores Realty Co. v. Cleveland (1975), 41
Ohio St.2d 41, 43, 322 N.E.2d 629. "Litigants must not be permitted to hold their
arguments in reserve for appeal, thus evading the trial court process." Nozik v. Kanaga
(Dec. 1, 2000), 11th Dist. No. 99-L-193, 2000 Ohio App. LEXIS 5615.
{¶28} Appellants also argue for the first time that legal remedies would be
inadequate in this case. Again, Appellants did not include such claim in their Complaint
and we will not consider said argument for the first time on appeal.
{¶29} Based on the foregoing, we find no error in the trial court’s dismissal of
Appellants’ Complaint pursuant Civ.R. 12(B)(6).
{¶30} Appellants’ sole Assignment of Error is overruled.
{¶31} For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the Court of Common Pleas of
Tuscarawas County, Ohio, is affirmed.
By: Wise, J.
Hoffman, P. J., concurs.
Farmer, J., concurs in part and dissents in part.
JWW/d 0729
10. Tuscarawas County, Case No. 2014 AP 12 0056 10
Farmer, J., concurs in part and dissents in part
{¶32} I respectfully dissent from the majority's opinion that Count I, Breach of
Express Terms, does not survive a Civ.R 12(B)(6) motion. Count 1 claims failure to pay
any royalties as required by the lease, and requests that because of the breach, the
lease should be terminated.
{¶33} Appellees and the majority argue this is a claim for forfeiture. In Black
Diamond, supra, the Supreme Court of Ohio acknowledged that forfeiture, although not
contained in the lease itself, may be a remedy if no other remedy exists.
{¶34} From a reading of the four corners of the complaint and the lease, I would
find that a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal is inappropriate and the claim should proceed.
{¶35} I concur that Count IV, Slander of Title, should be dismissed under
Civ.R.12(B)(6) because of the statute of limitations.