Search for: "Amerada Hess Corp" Results 21 - 40 of 47
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
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 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]
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]
29 Nov 2023, 4:02 am by Andrew Lavoott Bluestone
“Generally, a valid release constitutes a complete bar to an action on a claim that is the subject of the release” (Nucci v Nucci, 118 AD3d 762, 763; see Burnside 711, LLC v Amerada Hess Corp., 175 AD3d 557, 559). [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]
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]
1 Jan 2018, 11:43 am by scottgaille
The pipeline is operated by a subsidiary of the National Oil Corporation (NOC) and a joint venture with Hess Corp, Marathon Oil Corp and ConocoPhillips. . . . [read post]
20 Mar 2020, 9:48 pm by Sophia Tang
(Argentine Republic v Amerada Hess Shipping Corp, 488 US 428) Plaintiffs relied on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976, 28 U.S.C. [read post]
21 Mar 2020, 4:48 am by Sophia Tang
(Argentine Republic v Amerada Hess Shipping Corp, 488 US 428) Plaintiffs relied on the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976, 28 U.S.C. [read post]
25 May 2011, 3:21 am by Sean Wajert
Amerada Hess Corp., 379 F.3d 32, 50 (2d Cir. 2004) (expert’s opinion suffered from a “fatal flaw” when he acknowledged that cigarettes and alcohol were risk factors for developing squamous-cell carcinoma but failed to account for these variables in concluding that decedent’s cancer was caused by exposure to toxic chemicals such as benzene and PAHs). [read post]
24 Apr 2020, 11:33 am by Richard Altieri, Benjamin Della Rocca
Amerada Hess Shipping Corp., the fact that an injury occurred in the U.S. is insufficient to waive sovereign immunity. [read post]