Pages

Tuesday, March 6, 2012

Judicial Decision Affecting (Positively) Surface Rights Owners -- The Williston Basin, North Dakota, USA

Link here to NorthDecoder.com, a site with which I am not familiar. A reader alerted me to it.
In a 33 page decision issued yesterday, February 29, 2012, North Dakota federal district court judge Dan Hovland clarified some important North Dakota legal issues that will have significant implications for North Dakota surface rights owners, especially those in the Bakken oil field. Landowners and oil developers will likely have to consider Judge Hovland's decision in negotiating damages payments for allowing drilling rigs on land with severed mineral rights. 

By way of background, there is a federal court case pending in the North Dakota federal district courts that originated out of a disagreement between a Bakken-area surface rights owner and Enron Oil & Gas (EOG), an oil company that does a lot of business in the Bakken. 

5 comments:

  1. Maybe this will increase the chance of getting annual payments for pipelines

    ReplyDelete
  2. Seems as though state law was at issue so I wonder why a federal judge was involved.

    If there is ambiguity in the state law that allows for unreasonable surface owner demands such as a share of production which I have heard has/is happening it will be interesting to watch as both surface owners and oil cos will lobby politicians for legal provisions more favorable to their own interests.

    Last session, oil cos and surface owners got legislature to enact a law that automatically transferred severed minerals to the surface owner if the minerals were unused (I e unleased) for 20 years. No attempt to give notice to the severed mineral owner is required. In that law, farmers (surface owners) and oil cos were on the same page. This time (surface damages) they are polar opposites. Will be fun to watch to say the least. Maybe as fun as watching a man camp permit hearing :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With regard to the federal judge issue, maybe others have an explanation.

      I'm just happy that folks are sending me links to information that others may appreciate.

      Delete
  3. I think it has to do with the fact that oil companies have a track record of doing well in Federal Court. There are decades of case law in their favor.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One may want to be a bit careful about how far back to take these cases: the Native Americans probably have the best case for mineral rights across the entire US.

      Delete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.