Litigation (State & Federal) - GableGotwals

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 Melissa Pasha|2024-05-31T14:15:43-05:00June 20th, 2021|Comments Off

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 Melissa Pasha|2024-05-31T15:30:56-05:00May 31st, 2021|Comments Off

Oklahoma Supreme Court Win on Behalf of the Alcohol Industry

The Oklahoma Supreme Court recently struck down SB 608 in a legal challenge litigated by GableGotwals. The Firm represented participants from all three tiers of the alcohol industry—manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers—that objected to the unconstitutional legislation. SB 608 sought to roll back modernizations reforms to the state’s alcohol-distribution system that voters had approved under State Question 792. SB 608 would have forced wine and spirit manufacturers to sell to every licensed wholesaler in the state, even those which don’t agree to basic quality and inventory controls.

By Melissa Pasha|2024-05-31T15:31:29-05:00January 22nd, 2020|Comments Off

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 Melissa Pasha|2024-05-31T14:10:46-05:00March 25th, 2019|Comments Off

Summary Judgment Win on Behalf of a National P&C Carrier

GableGotwals obtained summary judgment on behalf of a national property and casualty insurance carrier in Federal Court in Muskogee. A man attempted to rob a bank, and in the process, killed the bank’s president, took a customer hostage, and fled the bank. The hostage was shot during the police pursuit and subsequently sued the bank, claiming she was injured because there was too much access to the bank and not enough security. The carrier filed a declaratory judgment action, seeking a ruling that its policy did not provide coverage for the hostage’s claims. The Court ruled in the carrier’s favor, holding that the policy was not ambiguous and that the carrier had no duty to indemnify or defend the bank for the claims being brought by the hostage. The Court stated that the policy did not cover intentional acts (such as the kidnapping and resulting injuries) and that the policy specifically excluded claims arising out of incidents of assault and battery.

By Melissa Pasha|2024-05-31T15:32:07-05:00May 31st, 2018|Comments Off

Previous 1617