1 / 12

OIPA Annual Meeting June 8, 2008

OIPA Annual Meeting June 8, 2008. Select Current Legal Issues and Trends Affecting the Oil and Gas Industry. When in deep trouble, say nothing and try to look inconspicuous. Stephens County Dist. Ct. Jury Verdict – May 9, 2008.

jacqui
Télécharger la présentation

OIPA Annual Meeting June 8, 2008

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. OIPA Annual MeetingJune 8, 2008 Select Current Legal Issues and Trends Affecting the Oil and Gas Industry

  2. When in deep trouble, say nothing and try to look inconspicuous.

  3. Stephens County Dist. Ct.Jury Verdict – May 9, 2008 • Hebble v. Shell Western E&P Inc. and Shell Oil Company, No. CJ-95-234L • Damages: $13,205,916.00 • Punitive Damages: $53,625,000.00

  4. BP Texas City Refinery Litigation • Plaintiffs Seek to Compel Production of Documents Used by BP to Compute the Reserve Amount Reported to the SEC for Potential Claims From the Explosion. In re BP Products North America Inc., 2006 WL 2973037 (Tex. App. – Hous. 2006)

  5. BP Texas City Refinery Litigation Appellate Court directs the Trial Court to enforce discovery agreement and to disallow the deposition of Lord Browne, former CEO of BP. In re BP Products North America Inc., Texas Supreme Court (No. 07-0119, Jan. 25, 2008). But seeCrest Infiniti II, LP v. Swinton, 2007 OK 77, 174 P.3d 996.

  6. Operating Agreement Disputes • Dispute Concerning the Method for Determining Salvage Value of Equipment on Well that was Proposed for Plugging and Abandonment. Mayfield Investments, Inc. v. Marjo Operating Co., Inc., 78 O.B.J. 2096 (Okla. App. 2007 - #103,271) (Not for Publication).

  7. Royalties Owed UnderForced Pooling Orders • Decision Addressing Royalty Underpayment Claims With Regard to Royalties Owing Under Forced-Pooling Orders. In re Application of New Dominion, L.L.C., Cause CD No. 200606332-T (dated September 19, 2007)

  8. Security Issues re Oil and Gas Facilities • Temporary Injunction Granted to Protect Against Public Disclosure of Detailed Data Concerning Location of Gas Pipelines and Related Information • Northwest Gas Ass’n v. Washington Utilities and Transp. Com’n, 168 P.3d 443 (Wash. App. 2007).

  9. ROYALTY LAWSUITS • Payments Made to Royalty Owners in Nationwide Settlement of Crude Oil Posted Price Royalty Lawsuits Was a One-Time Bonus or Premium and Did Not Trigger the Duty to File Amended Severance Tax Returns. State ex rel. Okla. Tax Comm’n v. Sun Company, Inc. (R&M), 78 O.B.J. 1658 and 2146 (Okla. App. 2007 - #103,776) (Not for Publication) (Pending on Further Review by Oklahoma Supreme Court)

  10. Other Active Areas of Litigation • Royalty computation issues • Related Oklahoma Tax Comm’n Suits • Qui Tam Cases • Exploration/Development/Venture Deals • Condemnation

More Related