In Anderson Energy Corp. v. Dominion Oklahoma Texas Exploration & Prod., Inc., (( 04-14-00170-CV, 2015 WL 3956212 (Tex. App.—San Antonio June 30, 2015, no. pet. h.) )) the San Antonio Court of Appeals answered the following questions involving a 1977 AAPL JOA, with a printed Pref Right, and a typewritten AMI:...
In a 5-4 decision, the Texas Supreme Court issued its opinion in Chesapeake Exploration, L.L.C. v. Hyder, 14-0302, 2015 WL 3653446 (Tex. June 12, 2015), holding that Chesapeake is prohibited from deducting postproduction costs from an “overriding royalty interest” described in a lease. The Majority noted that while...
In Introduction to Joint Operating Agreements, we reviewed several of the critical roles a JOA can play within the oil and gas industry. One of the first steps to understanding the JOA is to understand the anatomy of its several components. The AAPL Joint Operating Agreement is organized into the...
The 1989 JOA is one of the most common O&G forms. However, updates are need in response to 25 years of case law and continually evolving custom & practice. Introduction As we discussed in the last article pertaining to Oil and Gas Joint Operating Agreements, the JOA is...
The joint operating agreement (“JOA”) is the most commonly used instrument in the oil and gas industry, surpassed only by the oil and gas lease. In essence, a JOA provides the contractual basis for the cooperative exploration, development, and production of oil and gas properties among multiple leasehold cotenants. By...
There is a debate among Wyoming oil and gas attorneys, and I wanted to weigh in. Some (maybe even many) Wyoming lawyers believe an overriding royalty interest simply cannot be pooled in Wyoming without the owner's direct and express consent. Of course, this is only a debate in...
