Gatti v. State ex rel. Office of Conservation

Supreme Court of Louisiana

Gatti v. State ex rel. Office of Conservation

146 So. 3d 196, 2014 La. LEXIS 1804, 2014 WL 4376200

CourtSupreme Court of Louisiana

DecidedAugust 25, 2014

DocketNo. 2014-C-0863

StatusPublished

This text of 146 So. 3d 196 (Gatti v. State ex rel. Office of Conservation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Louisiana primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Gatti v. State ex rel. Office of Conservation, 146 So. 3d 196, 2014 La. LEXIS 1804, 2014 WL 4376200 (La. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

In re Beusa Energy L.L.C. f/k/a Beusa Energy Inc.; Chesapeake Operating Inc.; Comstock Oil and Gas Louisiana L.L.C.; QEP Energy Company; — Defendant(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E., No. 589, 350; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2013 CA 0289.

Prior report: La.App., 2014 WL 3517548.

|! Writs granted. The court of appeal is reversed. The district court’s ruling, which granted the defendants’ exceptions of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, no cause of action, no right of action and prescription/peremption are reinstated. The plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed without prejudice, as originally ordered by the district court.

[197]*197VICTORY, J., recused. KNOLL, J., would deny. HUGHES, J., would deny.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

In re Beusa Energy L.L.C. f/k/a Beusa Energy Inc.; Chesapeake Operating Inc.; Comstock Oil and Gas Louisiana L.L.C.; QEP Energy Company; — Defendant(s); Applying For Writ of Certiorari and/or Review, Parish of E. Baton rouge, 19th Judicial District Court Div. E., No. 589, 350; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. 2013 CA 0289.

Prior report: La.App., 2014 WL 3517548.

|! Writs granted. The court of appeal is reversed. The district court’s ruling, which granted the defendants’ exceptions of lack of subject matter jurisdiction, no cause of action, no right of action and prescription/peremption are reinstated. The plaintiffs’ claims are dismissed without prejudice, as originally ordered by the district court.

[197]*197VICTORY, J., recused. KNOLL, J., would deny. HUGHES, J., would deny.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

146 So. 3d 196, 2014 La. LEXIS 1804, 2014 WL 4376200, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gatti-v-state-ex-rel-office-of-conservation-la-2014.