future-focused

Litigating oil and gas marketing claims can easily cost companies seven figure numbers. In a space where legal guidance is sparse, Liskow’s decades of involvement, industry knowledge, and effective precision are the critical tools that yield the best possible outcome for our clients.

Overview

Marketing claims are often attacks on complicated company-wide decisions that an oil and gas operator or mineral lessee makes regarding marketing their oil or gas production. Liskow defends these decisions, practices, and the impacts thereof (both expected and unexpected). We are keenly aware of the stakes for our clients: these cases may bring wide-ranging implications for a company throughout a region and winning can prevent a flood of litigation. With an understanding of both upstream and midstream issues, Liskow historically defends more marketing claims than anyone in Louisiana.

Oil and gas marketing disputes can be some of the most specialized and document-intensive cases in the industry and require a steep learning curve. Not only do we possess the subject matter knowledge, but we can also quickly scale up to take on a major case.

With Liskow, you get lawyers who have been on the front lines of these disputes for as long as they have existed. In addition, Liskow’s lawyers have the unique ability to craft a defense that recognizes the modern day realities of oil and gas marketing even in the face of antiquated laws and regulations or complex agreements that may apply to a particular situation. In the few reported oil and gas marketing decisions that do exist, you will see a Liskow lawyer’s name. From marketing disputes in the earliest days of Louisiana’s mineral development, to the “take-or-pay” disputes of the 1980s, to modern disputes involving firm transportation and minimum volume commitment contracts, Liskow lawyers have always been at the forefront of disputes involving oil and gas marketing.

As we continue to evolve along with the oil and gas field, we find ourselves on the cutting edge of marketing dispute litigation, representing operators and non-operators, and seeing issues from all sides.

Liskow has experience in every oil and gas play in Louisiana

It is no overstatement to say that for a lot of the plays, we’ve been there since day one. We have represented the few major players and acquired intimate knowledge, firsthand, of how the play developed, how the infrastructure was built, what agreements were entered into and why certain parties made certain commitments. We were involved in defending issues during the development of the Haynesville Shale in real time and continue to use that knowledge to the advantage of our clients or in their defense. Our historical and current involvement is why clients trust us to help them navigate the issues in newer plays – at times, our knowledge about our client’s interests and historical interactions with other players is what allows for expedient resolution of claims without extensive litigation. However, in the appropriate case, Liskow lawyers vigorously litigate and defend marketing claims in creative ways that have led to many successes for firm clients.

Breaking down complex matters for judges and juries

Everyone who has worked in the business long enough knows that marketing deals are made based on projections, and that capacity expectations are not always met. The issues are also specific to each portion of production – for example, treatment, gathering or transportation. For every claim we defend, we hone a different analysis and lean on different experts to ensure that they tell our story by zeroing in on the specific issues that we want to target with surgical precision.

In deficiency fee claims, the key for both Liskow lawyers and the experts employed by them is to able to juggle all the pieces of a complex puzzle – while translating technical knowledge of the experts into an understandable story and sifting through mountains of paperwork to find essential details. That is how we win cases in court.

Notable Experience

  • Liskow represented BPX in a royalty case involving marketing costs between a mineral lessor and lessee. The case focused on a contractual provision that allowed our client to deduct marketing costs. Plaintiffs claimed that the charges did not fit within an exception of that lease clause. There was an issue of whether the sales and services were affiliated or unaffiliated with the entity charging the costs. Liskow litigated the dispute successfully, achieving a dismissal on partial motions for summary judgment, one for each issue – i.e., one for transportation costs, one for gathering costs. While the case is currently on appeal at the Second Circuit, it was a complete defense victory in a long, fact-intensive case.
  • We represent Petrohawk (now BPX) in a putative class action involving all former and current unleased owners in the State of Louisiana from January 1, 2008 to current in units operated by the defendant. Plaintiffs assert three counts of differing marketing claims. The firm successfully defeated the primary claim at the district court level. While that decision is currently on interlocutory appeal at the United States Fifth Circuit, the alternative claims remain extant in this pending litigation.

We are known for these strengths

We represent energy companies – the majors as well as smaller oil and gas players – in a variety of marketing disputes relating to deficiency fees, sales prices, cost deductions and post-production costs, royalty payments under the lease, and other aspects of the relationship between the operator and other parties. The issues often include:

  • Affiliated and unaffiliated arrangements and transactions
  • Deficiency fee claims
  • Firm transportation fees and agreements
  • Minimum volume commitment fees and agreements
  • Post-production costs
  • Pricing claims
  • Affiliated deduction and marketing claims

Initial Contacts

Our Team

Shareholders

Of Counsel

Associates

Insights