NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION STATE OF LOUISIANA
COURT OF APPEAL
FIRST CIRCUIT
2025 CW 0201
DEVON ENERGY PRODUCTION COMPANY, L.P.
l VERSUS
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND THOMAS HARRIS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
OCT 2 2 2025
Judgment Rendered:
Appealed from the
19th Judicial District Court In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge State of Louisiana
Docket No. C727086, Section 31
The Honorable Tiffany Foxworth- Roberts, Judge Presiding
Liz Murrill Counsel for Defendant/Appellant
Attorney General State of Louisiana through the David A. Peterson Department of Energy and Natural Jennifer Wise Moroux Resources'
Assistant Attorneys General Baton Rouge, Louisiana
and
Blake Canfield
Morgan D. Rogers
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
Esteban Herrera, Jr. Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee Victor J. Suane, Jr. Devon Energy Production Andre Bellefontaine Company, L.P.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
1 Although Thomas Harris was named separately as a defendant in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, he was referenced in conjunction with the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources in the initial petition filed by Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. In the judgment being appealed, the trial court notes that Tyler Gray is the secretary of what is now named the Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources (" LDENR"). Regardless, neither Thomas Harris nor Tyler Gray are parties to this appeal.
Donald T. Carmouche Counsel for Amicus Curiae Victor L. Marcello The Parish of Cameron John H. Carmouche William R. Coenen, III Brian T. Carmouche Todd J. Wimberley Ross J. Donnes D. Adele Owen Leah C. Poole Caroline H. Martin Christopher D. Martin Michael L. Heaton Baton Rouge, Louisiana
BEFORE: McCLENDON, C.J., THERIOT, AND STROMBERG, JJ.
N
THERIOT, J.
The Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources (" LDENR"), appeals the 19th Judicial District Court' s (" 19th JDC") September 30, 2024 Ruling
of the Court. For the following reasons, we convert the appeal to an application for supervisory writs, grant the writ application, vacate the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court, and remand this case to the 19" JDC for further proceedings in
accordance with this judgment. We further grant LDENR' s April 7, 2025 motion
to supplement the record.
Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. (" Devon"), through multiple
predecessors, conducted oil and gas operations and obtained Coastal Use Permits CUPs") at various times between 1974 and 2002 in three oil fields att issue in this
matter: Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake. These oil fields and all
associated CUPs are located in Cameron Parish, Louisiana.
Cameron Parish Lawsuits
In 2016, Cameron Parish filed eleven lawsuits (" Cameron Parish Lawsuits")
in the 38' Judicial District Court against current and former oil and gas exploration
operators in Cameron Parish, including three lawsuits2 against Devon and other defendants regarding coastal land loss and related CUPs. Cameron Parish alleged
that land loss is markedly higher at Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake because Devon and other defendants engaged in activities that violated their CUPS
2 On January 25, 2024, LDENR filed its combined findings of fact and conclusions of law, listing the following relevant lawsuits:
1) Parish of Cameron v. Alpine Exploration Companies Inc., et al, Suit No. 10-
19580 ( relating to Mallard Bay);
2) Parish of Cameron v. Anadarko E& P Onshore, LLC, et al, Suit No. 10- 19578 relating to Crab Lake);
3) Parish of Cameron v. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co., L.P., et al, Suit No. 10- 19575 ( relating to Deep Lake).
or the State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act, located at La. R.S. 214. 21, et seq. (" SLCRMA"). LDENR and the Louisiana Attorney General A.G.") subsequently intervened as plaintiffs in the Cameron Parish Lawsuits.
Devon' s Letters to LDENR Requesting Declaratory Rulin s
While the Cameron Parish Lawsuits were ongoing, Devon sent three letters to LDENR regarding its past operations in the three fields at issue. In these letters dated July 30, 2019, November 13, 2019, and January 14, 2020 — Devon
requested that LDENR issue declaratory rulings that Louisiana' s Rules and Procedures for CUPs did not apply to any activity conducted by Devon and/ or its predecessors in Mallard Bay Field, Crab Lake Field, and Deep Lake Field.' In the
alternative, Devon requested that LDENR ( 1) identify with specificity the violations of the CUPS, statutes, or regulations that LDENR alleges Devon to have
committed in each field, and ( 2) provide a compliance schedule that particularly
identifies the actions that Devon must take to come into compliance with those
permits, statutes, or regulations within a reasonable time.
LDENR did not respond to Devon' s requests. According to LDENR, it chose to intervene in the lawsuits instead because " it was more efficient than
instituting potentially thousands of administrative actions for enforcement in these cases." LDENR considers the Cameron Parish Lawsuits to be its enforcement
proceedings regarding Devon' s CUPs in Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake.
Devon' s Mandamus Action and the 2022 Mandamus Judgment
When LDENR did not respond to Devon' s requests, Devon filed a petition
for writ of mandamus in the 19th JDC on September 2, 2020, seeking an order
requiring LDENR and its secretary, Thomas Harris, to respond to each of those
3 Devon asserts that it sought specific declaratory rulings from LDENR pursuant to LDENR' s regulations and Louisiana' s Administrative Procedure Act. See La. R.S. 49: 950, et seq.
5
requests.' On August 24, 2022, following an August 10, 2022 hearing on the
which ( 1)
matter, the 19" JDC signed a judgment (" 2022 Mandamus Judgment")
granted Devon' s petition for writ of mandamus; ( 2) made peremptory an
Alternative Writ of Mandamus and Order" issued on September 3, 2020; and ( 3)
issued a writ of mandamus pursuant to La. Code Civ. P. art. 3 86 1, et seq., ordering
and directing LDENR to issue or cause to be issued declaratory rulings or, in the alternative, compliance schedules as sought by Devon in its requests for
declaratory rulings submitted on July 31, 2019, November 13, 2019, and January 14, 2020. 5 LDENR did not appeal the 2022 Mandamus Judgment.
Pursuant to the 2022 Mandamus Judgment, LDENR held a public hearing in Cameron, Louisiana on November 14, 2022, which was followed by a public comment period.
LDENR' s 2022 Declaratory Order On December 15, 2022, LDENR issued a Declaratory Order (" 2022 Declaratory Order") pursuant to the 2022 Mandamus Judgment. In the 2022
Declaratory Order, the Secretary of LDENR summarized Devon' s oil and gas activities in Cameron, as well as the resulting Cameron Parish Lawsuits in which LDENR and the A.G. intervened on the side of Cameron Parish. LDENR asserted
that the records submitted by Devon did not address all of the issues raised by the apparent land loss. LDENR further found that there were little to no records of the
activities of other operators who worked in the fields at issue, rendering it impossible to allocate responsibility among the various potentially responsible parties. LDENR concluded that it could not " exonerate Devon from responsibility or quantify its relative responsibility, if any" and further could not " determine
4 Devon' s September 2, 2020 petition for writ of mandamus was allotted to Judge Wilson E. Fields, Suit No. 699, 354, Division 25.
5 The 19th JDC ordered LDENR to issue its rulings and/ or compliance schedules on or before December 14, 2022.
effective compliance schedules." As a result, LDENR declared its intent to seek
resolution of those issues in the pending Cameron Parish Lawsuits.
Devon' s Petition for Judicial Review of the 2022 Declaratory Order and the February 15, 2024 Judgment On December 27, 2022, Devon filed a petition for judicial review of the
2022 Declaratory Order in the 19" JDC, alleging that the 2022 Declaratory Order violated the 2022 Mandamus Judgment and Louisiana' s Administrative Procedure Acta Specifically, Devon alleged that the 2022 Declaratory Order violated its equal protection and due process rights and was made upon unlawful procedure,
not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, and arbitrary and capricious.7 This matter was set for a bench trial on January 26, 2024.8 On February 15,
2024, following the bench trial, the trial court rendered judgment (" February 15, LDENR9 "
2024 Judgment") in favor of Devon and ordered the Secretary of to
comply with the final judgment on Writ of Mandamus and issue decree( s) or alternatively compliance order( s) ... solely relying on the existing record before the Secretary."
In reasons for judgment signed the same date, the trial court stated that
Devon was seeking review of a document issued by LDENR that contained no decretal language and further contained no orders issued in response to the 2022 Mandamus Judgment. The trial court returned the matter to LDENR and ordered
LDENR to comply with the 2022 Mandamus Judgment and issue a decree or
6 Devon' s petition for judicial review of the 2022 Declaratory Order was allotted to Judge Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts, Suit No. 727086, Division 31.
7 LDENR subsequently filed an application for supervisory writs with this Court as to the denial of exceptions it had raised to Devon' s petition. However, LDENR' s writ application was untimely and therefore not considered. See Devon Energy Protluction Company, L.P. v. Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, 2023- 0678 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 9/ 11/ 23), 2023 WL 5843576 ( unreported).
8 Although this matter was allotted to Judge Foxworth-Roberts, Judge James E. Kuhn presided ad hoc over the January 26, 2024 hearing.
9 Supra, footnote 1.
compliance order. Ultimately, the trial court did not decide any legal issues in the February 15, 2024 judgment.
LDENR' s 2024 Declaratory Ruli!ig On April 1, 2024, LDENR issued a Declaratory Ruling (" 2024 Declaratory Ruling") in response to the February 15, 2024 Judgment. In the 2024 Declaratory Ruling, LDENR ruled as follows: ( 1) LDENR will not issue compliance schedules; 2) all statutes governing state and local coastal resources apply to Devon' s CUPs; 3) LDENR " rules in favor of Devon" and " will not open an administrative
enforcement action against Devon at this time"; and ( 4) LDENR will maintain its
intervention in the Cameron Parish lawsuits.
Devon' s April 22, 2024 Motion for Contempt and the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court Relevantly, on April 22, 2024, Devon filed a motion for contempt, alleging that LDENR' s issuance of the 2024 Declaratory Ruling did not satisfy or comply with the 2022 Mandamus Judgment or the February 15, 2024 Judgment. Devon asserted that it had filed a petition for judicial review of LDENR' s 2024
Declaratory Ruling, which was assigned Docket No. 746842.
Devon' s motion for contempt —the only matter set for hearing on this date —
was heard by the trial court on August 7, 2024. 10 At this hearing, LDENR argued that Devon' s arguments rely on issues centered in the administrative appeal, which has not been substantively resolved. LDENR further asserted that a second
administrative appeal was pending.
On September 30, 2024, the trial court issued a judgment (" September 30,
2024 Ruling of the Court") ordering LDENR to issue specific declaratory rulings in response to each item in Devon' s Requests within 30 days, ordering Devon to
10 By this date, Judge Foxworth- Roberts had resumed her role as the presiding judge in this matter.
VA
issue a compliance schedule, and deferring a ruling on contempt. Notice of the
written judgment was mailed to the parties' counsels on October 2, 2024.
On October 25, 2024, LDENR electronically -filed a motion for suspensive appeal of the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court. On November 4, 2024,
Devon filed an opposition to LDENR' s motion for suspensive appeal, arguing that the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court is an interlocutory judgment that is not appealable.' 1 Likewise, on March 7, 2025, Devon filed a motion to dismiss the
appeal based upon the same argument. LDENR filed an opposition to Devon' s
motion to dismiss on March 14, 2025.
MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT
On April 7, 2025, LDENR filed a motion to supplement the appellate record
with the written reasons for judgment issued by the trial court in connection with the February 15, 2024 Judgment.
Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 2132 provides:
A record on appeal which is incorrect or contains misstatements, irregularities or informalities, or which omits a material part of the trial record, may be corrected even after the record is transmitted to the appellate court, by the parties by stipulation, by the trial court or by the order of the appellate court. All other questions as to the content and form of the record shall be presented to the appellate court.
Although appellate courts review judgments, not reasons for judgments, written
reasons for judgment are an explication of the trial court' s determinations. See
Wooley v. Lucksinger, 2009- 0571 ( La. 4/ 1/ 11), 61 So. 3d 507, 572. Accordingly, we grant LDENR' s April 7, 2025 motion to supplement the appellate record with
the written reasons for judgment associated with the February 15, 2024 Judgment.
MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL
In its March 7, 2025 motion to dismiss LDENR' s appeal, Devon asserts that
the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court is an unappealable, interlocutory
11 Devon also asserted LDENR did not appeal the February 15, 2024 Judgment.
judgment. This court' s appellate jurisdiction only extends to final judgments. Jones v. Fogg, 2024- 1048 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 5/ 30/ 25), 413 So.3d 580, 583, reh' g denied, Aug. 6, 2025. A final judgment is appealable in all cases in which appeals are given by law, while an interlocutory judgment is appealable only when expressly provided by law. La. Code Civ. P. art. 2083; Jones, 413 So.3d at 583. An interlocutory judgment does not determine the merits, but only preliminary matters in the course of the action, while a final judgment determines the merits in whole or in part. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1841; Jones, 413 So. 3d at 583.
The September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court does not determine the substantive merits of the case and is therefore an interlocutory judgment. See
Suazo v. Suazo, 2010- 0111 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 6/ 11/ 10), 39 So. 3d 830, 832. The
proper procedural vehicle to contest an interlocutory judgment is an application for supervisory writs. La. Code Civ. P. art. 2201; Prepotente v. Williams, 2024- 0906
La. App. 1 Cir. 2/ 21/ 25), 406 So. 3d 641, 643. When a party improperly appeals a non -appealable interlocutory judgment, this court has discretion to convert that appeal to an application for supervisory writs; however, this court may only do so if the appeal would have been timely had it been filed as a supervisory writ application. Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. A supervisory writ application must be filed within thirty days of the notice of judgment. See Uniform Rules — Courts of
Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3; Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643.
When an interlocutory judgment is rendered in open court, its rendition constitutes notice to all parties, unless certain exceptions apply. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1914( A); Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. The pertinent exceptions are if the trial
court orders that an interlocutory judgment be reduced to writing, or if the trial court takes the interlocutory matter under advisement, or if a party requests that the interlocutory judgment be reduced to writing within ten days of its rendition in open court. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1914( B); Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. In such
L"
cases, the interlocutory judgment shall be reduced to writing, the trial court clerk shall mail notice of the written judgment to each party, and the 30 -day delay for filing a writ application begins from the date of the mailing of the notice. See La. C. C. P. art. 1914( B); Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3;
Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643- 44.
In the instant case, notice of the written judgment was mailed on October 2, 2024. LDENR filed a motion for suspensive appeal on October 28, 2024, which is within 30 days of the mailing of the notice of written judgment. -.Because the appeal would have been timely had it been filed as a supervisory writ application,
this Court has discretion to convert the appeal to an application for supervisory writs. See Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3; Prelgotente, 406
So. 3d 643. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to convert the appeal to an application for supervisory writs.
The only matter set for hearing on August 7, 2024 was Devon' s motion for contempt. Rather than rule on the motion for contempt, the trial court issued a number of orders regarding certain declaratory rulings to be issued by LDENR and a compliance schedule to be issued by Devon. Being that the motion for contempt was not addressed by the trial court, we vacate the September 30, 2024 Ruling of
the Court and remand this matter for a contempt hearing.
DECREE
For the above and foregoing reasons, we convert the appeal of the
September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court filed by the Louisiana Department of
Energy and Natural Resources to an application for supervisory writs. We grant the writ application, vacate the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court, and
remand the matter to the trial court for a contempt hearing. We also grant the April 7, 2025 motion to supplement the record filed by the Louisiana Department of
Energy and Natural Resources. Costs of the appeal in the amount of $5, 110. 00 are
Of
11
to be split equally by the parties, with 50% of appeal costs being assessed to the Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources, and 50% of appeal costs being assessed to Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.
MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT GRANTED; APPEAL CONVERTED TO APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS; WRIT GRANTED; SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 RULING OF THE COURT VACATED; REMANDED TO THE DISTRICT COURT WITH INSTRUCTIONS.