Search for: "Amerada Hess" Results 21 - 40 of 58
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
14 Jul 2017, 8:47 am by Laura Springer Brown and Erin Bambrick
Amerada Hess Corporation, No. 100091 (17th JDC) appears to be the first time a state court has directly interpreted the meaning of the phrase “original condition” in the Article 22 context. [read post]
14 Jul 2017, 8:47 am by Erin Bambrick and Laura Springer Brown
Amerada Hess Corporation, No. 100091 (17th JDC) appears to be the first time a state court has directly interpreted the meaning of the phrase “original condition” in the Article 22 context. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 7:36 am by Liskow & Lewis
Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, a case that involved a predial (not a mineral) lease, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that whether damage to property is apparent or unapparent, the right to sue for such damage is a personal right that belongs to the landowner at the time the damage occurred unless the right has been explicitly assigned or subrogated to the subsequent buyer of the land. [read post]
12 Apr 2019, 8:49 am by Steven Cohen
The court notes that Borison’s curriculum vitae shows that he has forty years of experience in the maritime industry, which includes six years as a safety representative of Amerada Hess Corporation and sixteen years as a safety supervisor at McDermott, Inc. [read post]
12 Jun 2012, 4:00 am by Charles Sartain
Amerada Hess Corporation, a plaintiff who purchased property after environmental damage had been done did not have a right of action against those who caused the damage unless his seller specifically transferred that right in the Act of Sale. [read post]
12 Jun 2015, 7:36 am by Liskow & Lewis
Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, a case that involved a predial (not a mineral) lease, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that whether damage to property is apparent or unapparent, the right to sue for such damage is a personal right that belongs to the landowner at the time the damage occurred unless the right has been explicitly assigned or subrogated to the subsequent buyer of the land. [read post]
26 May 2015, 12:37 pm
The City also cites Wills v Amerada Hess Corp. in support of dismissal. [read post]
Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, a case that did not involve mineral rights, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that whether damage to property is apparent or unapparent, the right to sue for such damage is a personal right that belongs to the landowner at the time the damage occurred unless the right has been explicitly assigned or subrogated to the subsequent purchaser of the land. [read post]
2 Mar 2009, 6:26 am by EPSTEIN BECKER & GREEN, P.C.
Amerada Hess Corp., 769 So. 2d 1105, 1107 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 766 cmt. n (1977)). [read post]
Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, a case that did not involve mineral rights, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that whether damage to property is apparent or unapparent, the right to sue for such damage is a personal right that belongs to the landowner at the time the damage occurred unless the right has been explicitly assigned or subrogated to the subsequent purchaser of the land. [read post]
Amerada Hess Corp., 10-2267 (La. 10/25/11), 79 So. 3d 246, a case that did not involve mineral rights, the Louisiana Supreme Court held that whether damage to property is apparent or unapparent, the right to sue for such damage is a personal right that belongs to the landowner at the time the damage occurred unless the right has been explicitly assigned or subrogated to the subsequent purchaser of the land. [read post]