Quality Environmental Processes, Inc. v. Energy Development Corp., 218 So. 3d 1045

Plaintiffs Quality Environmental Processes, Inc. and Michael and Virginia St. Martin sued multiple defendants (now only IP Petroleum remains) seeking mineral royalties from production on the IP Pet. PPCO No. 1 well covering periods from June 29, 1997 until the well was plugged; $817,464.29 represents royalties paid to Phillips and Noble before April 1, 2001.
Plaintiffs previously settled with Phillips (2001) and Noble Energy (2005); those settlements conveyed mineral interests to the plaintiffs but contained provisions the trial court and parties disputed as to whether they conveyed rights to royalties accruing before April 1, 2001.
The Louisiana Supreme Court in Quality I (2014) held plaintiffs did not acquire mineral rights from a 1992 purchase, but remanded to consider royalty issues stemming from after-acquired rights from the 2001 and 2005 settlements.
After years of litigation and procedural skirmishing (including a formal dismissal for abandonment later vacated), IP Petroleum moved for partial summary judgment (Aug. 29, 2014) seeking dismissal with prejudice of plaintiffs’ claims to the $817,464.29 in royalties paid before April 1, 2001.
The trial court granted the partial summary judgment (April 8, 2015), certified it final under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B), and this appeal followed; the court concluded neither the 2001 nor 2005 settlements conveyed rights to pre-April 1, 2001 royalties.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1. Whether the trial court erred in vacating its prior formal abandonment dismissal	Plaintiffs: dismissal for abandonment should stand; court improperly vacated it	IP: formal discovery served April 5, 2012 interrupted abandonment, so vacatur proper	Held: Vacatur proper — IP’s formal discovery interrupted abandonment period under La. C.C.P. art. 561
2. Whether IP’s Aug. 29, 2014 partial summary judgment was untimely under the 2005 pre-trial order	Plaintiffs: deadlines in pre-trial order made IP’s motion untimely	IP: scheduled trial never occurred; pre-trial deadlines became moot pending new scheduling; IP’s motion timely	Held: Denial of plaintiffs’ motion to dismiss was correct — pre-trial deadlines were effectively moot and court did not abuse discretion
3. Whether summary judgment dismissing claims to royalties paid before Apr. 1, 2001 was proper	Plaintiffs: settlement documents and circumstances create triable issue that after-acquired rights include pre-April 1, 2001 royalties	IP: Quality I and the 2001/2005 settlement instruments do not convey royalties accruing before April 1, 2001; no genuine issue of material fact	Held: Affirmed — no genuine issue of material fact; neither settlement conveyed rights to royalties attributable to production before April 1, 2001, so summary judgment for IP granted

Quality Environmental Processes, Inc. v. I.P. Petroleum Co., Inc., 144 So.3d 1011 (La. 2014) (supreme court decision resolving title issues and remanding royalty questions)
R.J. Messinger, Inc. v. Rosenblum, 894 So.2d 1113 (La. 2005) (factors for certifying partial judgment final under La. C.C.P. art. 1915(B))
Louisiana Dept. of Transp. & Dev. v. Oilfield Heavy Haulers, L.L.C., 79 So.3d 978 (La. 2011) (construction and purpose of La. C.C.P. art. 561 abandonment doctrine)
Van ex rel. White v. Davis, 808 So.2d 478 (La. App. 1 Cir.) (discussion of final judgment and partial adjudication principles)
Hines v. Garrett, 876 So.2d 764 (La. 2004) (standard for summary judgment review)