scholarly journals Oklahoma

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 416-436
Author(s):  
Mark D. Christiansen
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
The United States ◽  
State Law ◽  
Trust Funds ◽  
White Star

The case of White Star Petroleum, LLC v. MUFG Union Bank, N.A. presented two questions of state law certified to the Oklahoma Supreme Court by the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Oklahoma: (1) Are the “trust funds” create[d] by Title 42 O.S. § 144.2, entitled “Creation and Appropriation of Trust Funds for Payment of Lienable Claims,” limited to obligations due nonoperator joint working interest owners, or do such funds include payments due [to] holders of mechanic’s and materialmen’s liens arising under and perfected by Title 42 O.S. § 144? (2) Does the Oil and Gas Owners’ Lien Act of 2010 grant an operator and non-operator working interest owner a lien in proceeds from purchasers of oil and gas which is prior and superior to any claim of the holder of a mechanic’s and materialmen’s lien asserted under Title 42 O.S. § 144? The above questions were certified to aid in the bankruptcy court’s resolution of two particular adversarial proceedings.

scholarly journals Virginia

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 454-455
Author(s):  
Daniel B. Kostrub
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Atlantic Coast ◽  
The United States ◽  
Appalachian Trail ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The City

This Article addresses developments in Virginia oil and gas law for the period from September 1, 2019, to September 1, 2020. During this period, the Supreme Court of the United States heard the Atlantic Coast Pipeline case, providing a significant ruling that allowed the pipeline to cross underneath the Appalachian trail. Additionally, Judge Chadwick S. Dotson of the Circuit Court of Wise County and the City of Norton issued an opinion regarding the mining of uranium in the Commonwealth.

Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk

1988 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 816-820
Author(s):  
Carlos M. Vázquez
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cook County ◽  
Appellate Court ◽  
State Law ◽  
Circuit Court ◽  
The Hague ◽  
The U.S

In this first decision by the United States Supreme Court on the scope and application of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters, better known as the Hague Service Convention, petitioner, a West German company, challenged the respondent’s attempt to serve process on petitioner by serving its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary in accordance with the state’s rules rather than pursuant to the procedures of the Convention. The Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, found that the relationship between the German parent and the U.S. subsidiary was such that, under state-law rules of agency, the U.S. subsidiary was the parent’s involuntary agent for service of process. Because service could thus be perfected entirely within the United States, the court held that it was not necessary to follow the procedures of the Hague Service Convention. The Illinois Appellate Court affirmed, and the Illinois Supreme Court denied leave to appeal. The U.S. Supreme Court (per O’Connor, J.) affirmed and held: (1) the Hague Service Convention is “mandatory” and preempts inconsistent state-law methods of service in all cases to which it applies; (2) the Convention applies where there is occasion to transmit a document abroad to charge persons with formal notice of a pending action; and (3) whether it is necessary to transmit a document abroad for such purposes is determined by the forum state’s internal law.

In the Supreme Court of the United States: Clara Watson v. Fort Worth Bank & Trust..

1988 ◽  
Vol 43 (12) ◽  
pp. 1019-1028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald N. Bersoff ◽  
Laurel P. Malson ◽  
Donald B. Verrilli
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
Fort Worth ◽  
The Supreme Court

Shale, Quakes, and High Stakes: Regulating Fracking-Induced Seismicity in Oklahoma, USA and Lancashire, UK

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-14
Author(s):  
Miriam R. Aczel ◽  
Karen E. Makuch
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Hydraulic Fracturing ◽  
Shale Gas ◽  
Seismic Activity ◽  
Oil And Gas ◽  
Oil And Gas Industry ◽  
High Volume ◽  
The United States ◽  
Horizontal Drilling ◽  
Induced Seismic Activity

High-volume hydraulic fracturing combined with horizontal drilling has “revolutionized” the United States’ oil and gas industry by allowing extraction of previously inaccessible oil and gas trapped in shale rock [1]. Although the United States has extracted shale gas in different states for several decades, the United Kingdom is in the early stages of developing its domestic shale gas resources, in the hopes of replicating the United States’ commercial success with the technologies [2, 3]. However, the extraction of shale gas using hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling poses potential risks to the environment and natural resources, human health, and communities and local livelihoods. Risks include contamination of water resources, air pollution, and induced seismic activity near shale gas operation sites. This paper examines the regulation of potential induced seismic activity in Oklahoma, USA, and Lancashire, UK, and concludes with recommendations for strengthening these protections.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document