Identifying and Quantifying Government Contract Claims
Government Contract Changes and Modifications - Webinar
Coverage Litigation Leapfrog: Why Venue Matters and How to Avoid Pre-emptive Strike Actions
Troutman Pepper COVID-19 Legal Issues Podcast Series: COVID-19 Commercial Leasing Trends (Part Two)
Will COVID-19 Qualify as a ‘Material Adverse Effect’?
Making Effective Use of the Claims/Disputes Process
FCPA Compliance and Ethics Report-Episode 45, Interview with Justice Ken Wise
Does the Texas Supreme Court’s Decision in Cactus Water Services v. COG Operating Provide Guidance About Lithium and Rare Earth Minerals Ownership in Pennsylvania? Lithium demand is expected to continue to increase as...more
On June 27, 2025, the Texas Supreme Court issued a pivotal decision in Cactus Water Services, LLC v. COG Operating, LLC, holding that under the language of the granting clause found in the standard oil and gas lease, produced...more
In American Midstream (Alabama Intrastate), LLC v. Rainbow Energy Marketing Corporation, the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court improperly inserted the words “scheduled” and “physical” into a contract. By...more
The so called “Anadarko Washout” involves a washout of oil and gas leases on undivided working interests owned by non-operating mineral cotenants. This particular species of lease washouts is based on two recent cases from...more
In this case (Scout Energy Mgmt., LLC v. Taylor Properties, No. 23-1014, 2024 WL 5249490 [Tex. Dec. 31, 2024]), the Texas Supreme Court held that vague notations on shut-in royalty check receipts cannot modify an unambiguous...more
In Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Underground Services Markham, LLC, No. 22-0878, 2025 WL 4356581 (Tex. May 16, 2025), the Texas Supreme Court resolved two significant issues affecting mineral owners and surface owners: (1) who owns...more
In this recent case, the Texas Supreme Court resolved whether ratification of a lease or signing of a stipulation agreement could transform a fixed non-participating royalty interest (NPRI) into a floating NPRI....more
This lease royalty case involved a dispute over whether the lessee was permitted to deduct volumes of gas used off the premises to power post-production activities on other gas produced from the same well. Carl v. Hilcorp...more
The Texas Supreme Court recently provided new guidance in interpreting force majeure language in an oil and gas drilling dispute. In Point Energy Partners Permian, LLC v. MRC Permian Company, the court held that the oil and...more
In Devon Energy Production Company, LP et al v. Sheppard et al, the Supreme Court of Texas construed what it referred to as a “bespoke” and “highly unique” royalty clause in several oil and gas leases to prohibit the...more
The Supreme Court of Texas has once again tackled the heavily contested issue of postproduction costs in royalty calculations. In Nettye Engler Energy, LP, v. BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC, No. 20-0639, the Court was...more
The Texas Supreme Court has agreed to hear oral arguments in a dispute over an “accumulation” provision in a continuous development clause of an oil and gas lease. The case is Endeavor Energy Resources L.P. v. Energen...more
The Supreme Court of Texas delivered good news to policyholders insured under a “Joint Venture Provision” endorsement commonly used in the oil and gas industry. In Anadarko Petroleum Corp. v. Houston Casualty Co.—a case...more
Insurance coverage litigation arising out of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion continues to result in important precedents that will impact energy companies and policyholders with operations in Texas. On January 25, the...more
The Texas Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in Barrow-Shaver Res. Co v. Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc., No. 17-0332, on the interpretation of a farmout agreement providing that an assignment could not be made “without the...more
The Texas Supreme Court (“Court”) recently ruled in favor of Murphy Exploration & Production Company—USA (“Murphy”) in a dispute arising from the location of an offset well on the properties of Shirley Mae Herbst Adams and...more
Two Texas Supreme Court decisions published on the same day confirm that retained acreage clauses that vary in language from one instrument to another will likely vary in effect. Depending on the language, the lessee might...more
Last month, the Texas Supreme Court upheld a lower court’s decision to toss a lawsuit by Orca Assets GP LLP against JP Morgan Chase over property in the Eagle Ford Shale. ...more
Recall the Battle of the Bastards: The heroic Lady Sansa and the duplicitous Lord Baelish gallop over the hill to save the foolish Jon Snow from the heinous Ramsey Bolton. In similar fashion, but without the malnourished...more
The ruling from the Supreme Court of Texas in JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al v. Orca Assets, G.P., L.L.C. was foreseeable. Experienced energy professionals who pass on the opportunity to examine title for themselves are...more
The Texas Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in three intriguing oil and gas cases. Here’s what you need to know about two of them (We’ll address the third case soon)....more
North Shore Energy v. Harkins interpreted an Option Agreement between landowners and a producer over a 400 acre tract. In football they would say the Texas Supreme Court pancaked the plaintiff. In the law, some would call it...more
Last month, in In re Deepwater Horizon, Relator, the Supreme Court of Texas applied a fundamental principle of insurance law to a case with enormous financial implications. The owner of the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig had...more
In In re Deepwater Horizon, Cause No. 13-0670, Slip Op., Feb. 13, 2015, the Texas Supreme Court held that an allocation of liability found in an “insured contract” would determine the coverage provided to an additional...more
In a much anticipated 8-1 decision, the Texas Supreme Court ruled Friday that BP is not entitled to additional-insured coverage in In re Deepwater Horizon, No. 13-0670 (Feb. 13, 2015)....more