Search

I. INTRODUCTION: 2020--AN UGLY YEAR FOR OIL & GAS II. BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Oil and Gas Basics: From Geology to Gasoline--Upstream, Midstream, and Downstream Sectors.136 1. The Importance of Gathering [...]

Abstract: Property rights in the subsurface of land are adapting to accommodate modern activities like massive hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Property rights will need to continue adapting if they are going [...]

I.would much prefer to be a judge than a coal miner because of the absence of falling coal (1) I. Introduction Imagine that you are planning to become your local [...]

I. INTRODUCTION Louisiana's coastal wetlands need protection. Thirty percent of the nation's wetlands are located in coastal Louisiana; however, coastal Louisiana accounts for 90% of the loss of coastal wetlands [...]

The rule of capture has been an integral part of oil and gas law since the completion of the first commercial oil well in Pennsylvania in the 1840s. The early development of the rule was subsumed within the larger question of whether oil and gas was a possessory or non-possessory interest or whether it was real property or personal properly. Many early cases relied on the ferae naturae or percolating waters analogy as they developed the rule of capture, which recognizes ownership of oil and gas in the party that brings it to the surface regardless of where the oil and gas lay in its natural state. As the rule of capture moved on to more complex issues, other than pure ownership, it was modified in a number of significant ways. A series of Indiana and Kentucky cases limited the rule by recognizing the correlative rights of others to capture oil or gas from the common source of supply. Thus, owners who employed artificial methods to produce the hydrocarbons, owners who negligently drilled into the common source of supply, and owners who wasted the hydrocarbons were not insulated from liability by the rule of capture. Modern oil and gas cases typically involve more complex issues than ownership of oil and gas. Thus, where an oil and gas operator directionally drills a well that is bottomed on the land of another, he may not assert a rule of capture defense to limit liability to the amount of oil and gas originally located under the neighbor's land Oil and gas conservation statutes have had the greatest impact on the rule of capture by limiting the ability of oil and gas owners to drill wells. Where an oil and gas operator violates conservation regulations by appropriating more oil and gas than was authorized by the state regulations, the operator may not plead the rule of capture to defend his actions. Nevertheless, the rule of capture continues to apply to the extent conservation law or orders do not preempt it. Indeed, continued recognition of the rule, together with recognition of correlative rights, is essential to the efficient administration of conservation laws. Finally, the authors opine that the rule of capture should not be applied to restrict the owner of a mineral estate from engaging in geophysical operations even where such operations emit seismic waves that enter onto the lands of others. As long as the geophysical operations are located on lands where the mineral estate owner has given permission, the fact that information is gained regarding other owner's lands should not give the non-consenting owner a cause of action for trespass based on the rule of capture. The authors likewise argue that hydraulic fracturing should be protected from trespass actions., I. INTRODUCTION II. THE LEADING CASES A. The "Pure" Form of the Rule of Capture B. The Indiana/Kentucky, Approach: Correlative Rights. C. The Choice Between Correlative Rights and the Pure […]