Chief\u27s Orders 88-847, 89-36, 89-337, and 89-39

Ohio Oil & Gas Board of Review

English

bepress Legal Repository

Appeal No. 0363: Royal Petroleum Properties, Inc. v. J. Michael Biddison, Chief, Division of Oil and Gas

Case Western Reserve University School of Law

BOARD OF OIL AND GAS REVIEW DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS DEPARTHENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, STATE OF OHIO ROYAL PETROLEUM PROPERTIES, INC. by: JOHN J. HUNTER, Trustee in Bankruptcy Appellant APPEALS NOS. 363-366 J. MICHAEL BIDDISON, CHIEF Division of oil & Gas Ohio Department of Natural Resources Fountain Square, Columbus Ohio 43224 Appellee Appearances: For Appellant: Mr. Thomas J. Schank Attorney at Law Hunter & Shank, LPA 5403 Summit Street Toledo, Ohio 43611 For Appellee: Anthony J. Celebrezze, Jr Attorney General 1 By: Scott E. Farkas Assist. Attorney General Fountain Square, Columbus Ohio 43224 ENTRY This matter came on for hearing before the oil and Gas Board of Review on March 13, 1990, in the First Floor Conference Room Building E., Fountain Square, Columbus, Ohio pursuant to a Notice of Appeal filed by the Appellant. The appeal was taken from the Orders of the Chief, Division of Oil and Gas, No. 88-847, 89-36, 89-337 and 89-396 to Royal Petroleum Properties, Inc., ordering the plugging of certain wells cited in the specific orders. The Appellant, by its Attorney for the Trustee in Bankruptcy, appeared at the hearing of the Board. It was stipulated that the wells in question were not in compliance, however, the Appellant claimed an inability to carry out the orders of the Chief owing to several different facts, to wit: 1. Although the Trustee is the permit holder on the records of the Division of oil and Gas, actual possession and control of 180 wells is in other hands, and 2. Although the Trustee moved the Bankruptcy Court to tranfer control of all wells to the Trustee, the motion was denied. 3. The filing of the Chapter 11 action in Bankruptcy Court was prior to the orders of the Chief. ISSUES The specific issue raised in this Appeal is whether the Chief of the Divison of oil and Gas lawfully and reasonably ordered the plugging of the subject wells, where as here, the subject wells are part of the bankruptcy estate and consequently 2 the order is also subject to a stay under the bankruptcy laws? FINDINGS Qf FACT 1. Based on the testimony of the witnesses the Board finds that the wells are not incompliance with the orders. 2. In keeping with the prior decision of the Board in Gem Energy ~ Houser, Appeal No. 152, the Board finds that it is has no authority to decide the questions of conflicts of laws raised by the Appellant, ands 3. There is no disagreement otherwise as to the lawful and reasonable nature of the orders. Based on these findings of fact, the Board of oil and Gas Review ORDERS, that Appeals363, 364, 365 and 366 are here by DISMISSED and that Adjudication Orders Nos. 88-847, 89-36, 89-337 and 89-396 be and and hereby ---• Coogan, C ~~\AM.(,( Robert H. Alexander, Secretary William G. Wirliams 3 

https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1450&amp;context=oil_and_gas

Appeal No. 0363: Royal Petroleum Properties, Inc. v. J. Michael Biddison, Chief, Division of Oil and Gas

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

bepress Legal Repository

Case Western Reserve University School of Law