Archive
 
Video Library
Broadcast
 
Broadcast ScheduleChannel LocatorAffiliatesDaily Streaming Schedule
About
 
About the Ohio ChannelFrequently Asked QuestionsContact UsJob OpportunitiesSite RequirementsMedia Information
 
 
A SERVICE OF OHIO'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATIONS
A SERVICE OF OHIO'S PUBLIC BROADCASTING STATIONS
ARCHIVEBROADCASTABOUT
Total Views 91,219,793
Total Views 91,219,793
Broadcast Schedule Channel Locator Affiliates Daily Streaming Schedule
 
 
About The Ohio Channel Frequently Asked Questions Contact Us Job Opportunities Site Requirements Media Information
 
 
 
Supreme Court of Ohio - Case No. 2014-1933 Clyde A. Hupp, et al. v. Beck Energy Corporation and XTO Energy, Inc. and Case No. 2014-0423 State of Ohio ex rel. Claugus Family Farm, L.P. v. Seventh District Court of Appeals, et al. Expand
 
 
December 15, 2015
12-15-2015
2,538 Views
Share Download
 
Start At    sec      End At    sec
 
Link
Embed Code
Available Versions
Download 360p VideoDownload 720p Video
 
 
To download a video: right-click on the version you'd like to save, then choose "Save Link As..." and save to your desktop.
 
Collections
Supreme Court of Ohio
 
Description
Clyde A. Hupp, et al. v. Beck Energy Corporation and XTO Energy, Inc., Case No. 2014-1933

State of Ohio ex rel. Claugus Family Farm, L.P. v. Seventh District Court of Appeals, et al., Case No. 2014-0423

Seventh District Court of Appeals (Monroe County)

ISSUES:

-Are leases Monroe County landowners and others signed with Beck Energy void because they are worded to allow Beck to perpetually control the mineral rights while not attempting to drill for oil or gas?

-Do the Beck leases properly contain a primary and secondary clause that requires it drill for oil and gas in the first 10 years of the lease and that it can only control the land as long as they are actively producing?

-Do an estimated 700 Ohio landowners with Beck leases who were made part of a class-action suit against Beck without notice have the right to end their leases and renegotiate new ones if they choose?

-Was an appeals court authorized to place an order freezing all 700 contested leases, and allowing the clock to start running again on them only after the litigation is resolved?
Related Links
Case Information For Case #2014-1933
Oral Argument Preview For Case #2014-1933
Opinion Summary For Case #2014-1933
Case Information For Case #2014-0423
Oral Argument Preview For Case #2014-0423
Opinion Summary For Case #2014-0423
 
 
 
 
Copyright Disclaimer Terms of Use Contact Us Support
 
 
© 2025 The Ohio Channel / ideastream.
All Rights Reserved.