$13.1 Million Term and Revolving Loan Facility

GableGotwals represented the lender in the negotiation and documentation of a $13.1 million term and revolving loan facility to a local oil and gas producer.

By |2024-04-15T16:18:27-05:00July 16th, 2021|Comments Off on $13.1 Million Term and Revolving Loan Facility

$14.5 Million Term Loan Facility

GableGotwals represented the lender in the negotiation and documentation of an $14.5 million term loan facility to an oil and gas producer.

By |2024-04-15T16:19:17-05:00July 16th, 2021|Comments Off on $14.5 Million Term Loan Facility

Shelf Registration Statement

GableGotwals advised an energy company in connection with filing of an automatic shelf registration statement.

By |2024-04-15T16:37:51-05:00July 16th, 2021|Comments Off on Shelf Registration Statement

$400 Million Credit Facility

GableGotwals represented an energy company in acquiring a $400 million 364-day revolving credit facility for working capital, mergers and acquisitions, refinancing of indebtedness and other general corporate purposes.

By |2024-04-15T16:44:48-05:00July 16th, 2021|Comments Off on $400 Million Credit Facility

Major Litigation Victory for Superior Pipeline Company

A producer behind one of Superior’s gas processing plants claimed entitlement to a percentage of Superior’s condensate proceeds even though the contract did not require it. Superior won in district court, the producer appealed, but Oklahoma’s Court of Civil Appeals affirmed judgment for Superior. On June 2nd, the Oklahoma Supreme Court denied the producer’s Petition for Certiorari (Case No. 111,373). In addition, the court also awarded Superior 100% of its attorneys’ fees, just under $200,000.00.

By |2024-05-31T14:15:43-05:00June 20th, 2021|Comments Off on Major Litigation Victory for Superior Pipeline Company

Unanimous Oklahoma Supreme Court Decision Regarding the Power of Eminent Domain

GableGotwals secured a unanimous victory from the Oklahoma Supreme Court regarding the necessity of takings under the power of eminent domain. The Firm’s client, a FERC interstate natural gas pipeline, brought a condemnation action to acquire additional easement rights, including access easements over existing roads because the existing agreements between the parties did not provide reliable access to the pipelines and facilities for erosion control and maintenance work. The landowner challenged the necessity of the taking, arguing that the preexisting easements preempted any later exercise of eminent domain and that the taking did not meet the legal standard of necessity for public use. The Oklahoma Supreme Court rejected the landowner’s arguments and ruled in favor of the Firm’s client. In affirming the district court’s ruling, the Oklahoma Supreme Court upheld well settled law that the right of eminent domain cannot be contracted away, meaning that preexisting easements do not prevent later exercise of eminent domain. The Court also reiterated that condemning authorities, such as pipelines, have wide discretion in determining the location and routes of their easements. The Court concluded that the easement rights sought in the condemnation action were necessary for the public use.

By |2024-05-31T15:30:56-05:00May 31st, 2021|Comments Off on Unanimous Oklahoma Supreme Court Decision Regarding the Power of Eminent Domain

Oklahoma Jury Finds for Range Resources and Rejects Plaintiff’s Royalty Underpayment Claims

On March 25, 2019, a jury in Anadarko, Oklahoma, issued a unanimous verdict in favor of Range Resources Corporation (Range), rejecting claims by 11 plaintiffs that Range had underpaid their royalties. The plaintiffs had opted out of an earlier class action settlement and brought individual claims alleging Range had underpaid royalties on gas production from 13 different wells. Range maintained it had properly paid royalties on the proceeds received by it from selling the gas production at or near the wells to various third-party purchasers under percentage-of-proceeds or percentage-of-index contracts, and that the gas was a marketable product when so sold. Typical of many cases making similar claims, plaintiffs contended the percentage-of-proceeds and percentage-of-index sales were disguised “service” agreements, and that the gas was not marketable until after it was processed at the buyers’ downstream processing plants. Following a two-week trial, the Court submitted the case to the jury on plaintiffs’ claims of breach of lease, fraud, and breach of fiduciary duty. The jury returned a unanimous verdict in favor of Range and against all plaintiffs on all claims.

By |2024-05-31T14:10:46-05:00March 25th, 2019|Comments Off on Oklahoma Jury Finds for Range Resources and Rejects Plaintiff’s Royalty Underpayment Claims

GableGotwals Featured as one of 17 law firms with the Strongest Client Relationships in the Energy Industry

BTI research reveals 17 law firms stand out with the strongest relationships—who are both core and recommended first in the Energy industry.  GableGotwals was recently featured in the BTI Industry Power Rankings 2017 along with several other nationally recognized firms. BTI Power Rankings 2017 is based solely on in-depth telephone interviews with leading legal decision [...]

By |2022-03-18T11:17:07-05:00July 14th, 2017|Comments Off on GableGotwals Featured as one of 17 law firms with the Strongest Client Relationships in the Energy Industry
Go to Top