1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 636 F.3d
  5. 636 F.3d 235 (2011)
 

POPLAR CREEK DEVELOPMENT v. CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA

Nos. 09-5914, 10-5373.

636 F.3d 235 (2011)

POPLAR CREEK DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. CHESAPEAKE APPALACHIA, L.L.C., Defendant-Appellee. John Thacker, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; Jackson Rowe, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellees, Poplar Creek Development Company; Alma Land Company; Appalachian Land Company, Claimants-Appellants, v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C.; Ni-Source, Inc.; Columbia Energy Group, Defendants-Appellees.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Decided and Filed: February 17, 2011.

Rehearing Denied March 7, 2011.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

ARGUED: George E. Stigger, St. Marys, Georgia, Gary E. Mason, Mason LLP, Washington, D.C., for Appellants. Barbara B. Edelman, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Lexington, Kentucky, Anne A. Chesnut, Greenebaum Doll & McDonald PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, Clark C. Johnson, Stites & Harbison, PLLC, Louisville, Kentucky, for Appellees. ON BRIEF: George E. Stigger, St. Marys, Georgia, Gary E. Mason, Donna F. Solen, Mason LLP, Washington, D.C., John C. Whitfield, Whitfield & Cox, P.S.C., Madisonville, Kentucky, for Appellants. Barbara B. Edelman, Whitney Howard Mendiondo, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, Lexington, Kentucky, Anne A. Chesnut, Joseph A. Tarantelli, Greenebaum Doll & McDonald PLLC, Lexington, Kentucky, Clark C. Johnson, Marjorie A. Farris, Stites & Harbison, PLLC, Louisville, Kentucky, John Famularo, Thomas E. Meng, Daniel E. Danford, Stites & Harbison, Lexington, Kentucky, for Appellees.

Before: GILMAN and GRIFFIN, Circuit Judges; COLLIER, Chief District Judge.

OPINION

GRIFFIN, Circuit Judge.

These cases arise out of a dispute over the respective rights of lessors and lessees under Kentucky oil and gas leases. Both actions are resolved by determining whether Kentucky law allows lessees, in calculating gas royalty payments, to take into account certain post-production costs as an offset against the value or proceeds upon which royalty payments are based. Because the two appeals involve the same or similar leases...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases