Tuesday, July 15, 2008

Texas Frac Trespass Decision Nears

An expected far-reaching decision from the TX Supreme Court could be released soon. As reported by the Fort Worth Business Press, "[t]he lawsuit stems from a 2005 Hidalgo County dispute in which Garza Energy Trust was granted $14 million for the court’s findings that the trust had been the victim of subsurface trespass due to hydraulic fracturing." Apparently, the frac job had allegedly extended beyond the unit boundaries of the particular well and into neighboring property. Depending on the outcome of the case, companies may have to "tone down" their frac jobs to avoid such problems.

While the decision would be legally binding only in TX, that state's oil and gas law is considered to fairly persuasive authority in other producing states. Stay tuned.

Fort Worth Business Press

8 comments:

Bobcat said...

The way the article is written by the reporter and in particular if the expert is quoted accurately, then it seems to me that proving which spacing unit oil came from and in what quantity is difficult if not impossible under normal competent operations. There are too many variables involved to yield a precise fracture boundry that will eliminate any crossover. If this is the case, then the court should rule that the neighboring spacing unit is responsible for developing its minerals or asking for pooling if development of the adjacent spacing unit is not a proper way to proceed.

Anonymous said...

i assume that texas is a "rule of capture" state, most are.

"rule of capture" is based on olde english law where it was legal to capture any game that crossed your land. this has been applied in most states in regulating oil and gas rights.

and i suppose the texas court ruling gives notice that it is not legal to set your traps on your neighbor's land. i suppose that is where the trespass law applies.

texas seems to take this rule of capture to an extreme. i know in some cases, multiple wells have been drilled nearly side by side across a lease line. the only restriction being the setback from the lease line.

Anonymous said...

Just letting you know NEW Corporate Presentation from Brigham Oil and Gas up for July.

Anonymous said...

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/apwire/c8eb510fea80b7c72cc78d0a9aabf717.htm

Anonymous said...

The Voigt 24 in Dunn County just came of confidential yesterday. Anyone have any information on how this well is doing or why it came off so early?

Anonymous said...

Oops--I read this wrong. The Voigt is not off confidential it was just listed as plugged or producing. My mistake. Sorry!

Anonymous said...

Teegue do you know what happened with the Tracker hearing on doubleing the size of the Little Knife field ?

Teegue said...

I heard second-hand that there was no opposition. Tracker removed about a half dozen sections that were already in Lone Butte Field. They said they wanted expedited consideration for one unit near that area so they can start the dirt work because they have a rig coming from Canada on Aug. 15th.

They also said they might use two or three laterals on some wells. They are apparently drilling a tri-lateral now in eastern Dunn Co. They may also try the Three Forks. Sounds like they are planning to use one of their other two rigs in that area also. Don't know if they ever claimed that they would be the operator on all the wells.

Bottom line. . . sounds like it will go through except for those sections they dropped.