United States v. Louisiana

422 U.S. 13, 95 S. Ct. 2022, 44 L. Ed. 2d 652, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 9
Supreme Court of the United States·Decided June 16, 1975·No. 9 ORIG·Published·Cited by 45 cases

Opinion

SUPPLEMENTAL DECREE

On March 17, 1975, this Court overruled the exceptions of the United States and the State of Louisiana to the Report and recommendations of the Special Master, accepted the Report of the Special Master and directed the parties “to prepare and file a decree for entry by this Court, establishing ‘a baseline along the entire coast of the State of Louisiana from which the extent of the territorial waters under the jurisdiction of the State of Louisiana pursuant to the Submerged Lands Act can be measured.’ ” 420 U. S. 529, 530. The parties have agreed on a proposed decree establishing the coastline (baseline) of Louisiana in accordance with the Court’s decision of March 17, 1975. That baseline i§ described in Exhibit A below. Accordingly, the joint motion for entry of supplemental decree is granted.

It Is Ordered, Adjudged, and Decreed :

1. As against the defendant State of Louisiana and all persons claiming under it, the United States has exclusive rights to explore the area of the Continental Shelf lying more than three geographical miles seaward of the line described in Exhibit A hereof, and to exploit the natural resources of said area and the State of Louisiana is not entitled to any interest in such lands, minerals, and resources, and said State, its privies, assigns, lessees, *14 and other persons claiming under it are hereby enjoined from interfering with the rights of the United States in such lands, minerals and resources.

2. All sums now held impounded by the United States under the Interim Agreement of October 12, 1956, as amended, and derived from leases of lands lying wholly within the area referred to in paragraph 1 hereof are hereby released to the United States absolutely, and in accordance with the terms of the Interim Agreement, as amended, and the United States is hereby relieved of any obligation under said Agreement to impound any sums hereafter received by it from leases of lands lying wholly within said area.

3. As against the plaintiff United States and all persons claiming under it, the State of Louisiana has exclusive rights to explore the area lying within three geographical miles seaward of its coastline described in Exhibit A hereof, and to exploit the natural resources of said area, with the exceptions provided by Section 5 of the Submerged Lands Act, 67 Stat. 32, 43 U. S. C. § 1313. The United States is not entitled to any interest in such lands, minerals, and resources and said United States, its privies, assigns, lessees and other persons claiming under it are hereby enjoined from interfering with the rights of the State of Louisiana in such lands, minerals and resources.

4. All sums now held impounded by the State of Louisiana under the Interim Agreement of October 12, 1956, as amended, derived from leases of lands lying wholly within the area referred to in paragraph 3 hereof are hereby released to Louisiana in accordance with the Interim Agreement of 1956, as amended, and Louisiana is hereby relieved of any obligation under said Agreement to impound any sums hereafter received by it from leases of lands lying wholly within said area.

*15 5. Within 90 days after the entry of the Decree—

(a) The State of Louisiana shall pay to the United States or other persons entitled thereto under the Interim Agreement of October 12, 1956, as amended, all sums, if any, now held impounded by the State of Louisiana under said Agreement, derived from or attributable to the lands, minerals or resources described in paragraph 1 hereof;

(b) The United States shall pay to the State of Louisiana or other persons entitled thereto under the Interim Agreement, as amended, all sums, if any, now held impounded by the United States under said Agreement, derived from or attributable to the lands, minerals or resources described in paragraph 3 hereof;

(c) Failure of either party to agree on correctness of the sums due the other shall in no way be reason to retard payment of sums which are admittedly due by the paying party’s own calculations.

6. Within 60 days after the entry of this Decree — •

(a) The State of Louisiana shall render to the United States and file with the Court a true, full, accurate and appropriate account of any and all other sums of money derived by the State of Louisiana since June 5, 1950, either by sale, leasing, licensing, exploitation or otherwise from or on account of any of the lands, minerals or resources described in paragraph 1 hereof;

(b) The United States shall render to the State of Louisiana and file with the Court a true, full, accurate and appropriate account of any and all other sums of money derived by the United States either by sale, leasing, licensing, exploitation or otherwise from or on account of the lands, minerals or resources described in paragraph 3 hereof;

(c) Within 60 days after receiving the account provided for by paragraph 6 (a) or 6 (b) hereof, a party *16 may serve on the other and file with the Court its objections thereto. Thereafter either party may file such motion or motions at such time as may be appropriate to have the account settled in conjunction with the issues concerning the areas still in dispute. If neither party files such an objection within 60 days, then each party shall forthwith pay to any third person any amount shown by such accounts to be payable by it to such person, and the party whose obligation to the other party is shown by such accounts to be greater shall forthwith pay to the other party the net balance so shown to be due. If objections are filed but any undisputed net balance is shown which will be due from one party to the other party or to any third person regardless of what may be the ultimate ruling on the objections, the party so shown to be under any such obligation shall forthwith pay each such undisputed balance to the other party or other person so shown to be entitled thereto. The payments directed by paragraphs 5 (a) and 5 (b) hereof shall be made irrespective of the accountings provided for by paragraphs 6 (a) and 6(b).

7. All sums heretofore impounded pursuant to the Interim Agreement of 1956, as amended, shall be fully accounted for and paid within the 90 days provided in paragraph 5, except as to split leases that accounting and payment may be deferred on royalty revenue from (a) non-unitized wells with completion points at unidentified locations or locations controverted by the parties; and (b) units partially shoreward of the three-mile boundary as to which there is no present agreement that participation is on a surface acreage basis.

Funds from split leases not accounted for and paid pursuant to the preceding sentence shall be the subject of the accounting to follow the next decree of this *17 Court in this case, unless the parties agree on a prior distribution.

Except as provided above for accountings and payment, pending further order of the Court, leases of land lying partly within three miles of the line described in paragraph 9 hereof shall be in no way affected by anything contained in this Decree.

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

United States v. Louisiana, 422 U.S. 13, 95 S. Ct. 2022, 44 L. Ed. 2d 652, 1975 U.S. LEXIS 9 (1975).

422 U.S. 13 (United States v. Louisiana) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Untitled Case
D. Nevada, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
Untitled Case
E.D. California, 2026
(PC) Brooks v. Smith
E.D. California, 2025
(PC) Bennett v. Wolk
E.D. California, 2025
(PC) Bland v. Cox
E.D. California, 2025
Scott v. Rahimi
N.D. California, 2025
EcoHub, LLC v. Recology Inc.
N.D. California, 2025
(PC) Foust v. Allen
E.D. California, 2025
Gutierrez v. City of Antioch
N.D. California, 2024
(PS) Josephson v. Olson
E.D. California, 2024
(PC) Anderson v. Smith
E.D. California, 2024
Floyd v. DoorDash Inc
W.D. Washington, 2024
(PC) Bradford v. De Franco
E.D. California, 2024
Turner v. Athene
N.D. California, 2023
Smith v. Mesa, City of
D. Arizona, 2023