Royalty and Royalty Interests: Calculation Methodology Court Jurisdiction, Procedure and Review: Class Action Certification

摘要

This is a consolidated appeal of two separate cases, Poplar Creek and Thacker. The Thacker case involved a settlement of a class action asserting various claims against the Defendants relating to alleged royalty underpayment and agreements to enter into fixed price natural gas sales contracts. The facts in those cases are discussed supra.Thacker v. Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C., 259 F.R.D. 262,172 0.&G.R. 637, (E.D.Ky. 2009), 695 F.Supp.2d 521, 172 O.&G.R. 652, (E.D.Ky. 2010). The Poplar Creek case was separately filed and principally challenged the use of the netback methodology in calculating royalties, arguing that Kentucky would follow the West Virginia rule set forth in Estate of Tawney v. Columbia Natural Resources, L.L.C. 219 W.Va. 266, 633 S.E.2d 22, 167 O.&G.R. 496 (2006). The District Court, in an unreported opinion, 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74269 (E.D.Ky. July 2, 2010) concluded that Kentucky law was different than West Virginia law on how to calculate royalties and dismissed the lawsuit. As to both Thacker and Poplar Creek, the court affirms the decisions of the District Court.