Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. v. Thomas Harris, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources

NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION

STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST CIRCUIT

2025 CW 0201

DEVON ENERGY PRODUCTION COMPANY, L.P.

l
VERSUS

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND THOMAS
HARRIS, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS SECRETARY OF THE
LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

OCT 2 2 2025
Judgment Rendered:

Appealed from the
19th Judicial District Court
In and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge
State of Louisiana
Docket No. C727086, Section 31

The Honorable Tiffany Foxworth- Roberts, Judge Presiding

Liz Murrill Counsel for Defendant/Appellant

Attorney General State of Louisiana through the
David A. Peterson Department of Energy and Natural
Jennifer Wise Moroux Resources'
Assistant Attorneys General
Baton Rouge, Louisiana
and

Blake Canfield
Morgan D. Rogers
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

Esteban Herrera, Jr. Counsel for Plaintiff/Appellee
Victor J. Suane, Jr. Devon Energy Production
Andre Bellefontaine Company, L.P.
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

1 Although Thomas Harris was named separately as a defendant in his official capacity as
Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, he was referenced in conjunction
with the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources in the initial petition filed by Devon Energy
Production Company, L.P. In the judgment being appealed, the trial court notes that Tyler Gray
is the secretary of what is now named the Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural
Resources (" LDENR"). Regardless, neither Thomas Harris nor Tyler Gray are parties to this
appeal.

Donald T. Carmouche Counsel for Amicus Curiae
Victor L. Marcello The Parish of Cameron
John H. Carmouche
William R. Coenen, III
Brian T. Carmouche
Todd J. Wimberley
Ross J. Donnes
D. Adele Owen
Leah C. Poole
Caroline H. Martin
Christopher D. Martin
Michael L. Heaton
Baton Rouge, Louisiana

BEFORE: McCLENDON, C.J., THERIOT, AND STROMBERG, JJ.

N

THERIOT, J.

The Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources (" LDENR"),

appeals the 19th Judicial District Court' s (" 19th JDC") September 30, 2024 Ruling

of the Court. For the following reasons, we convert the appeal to an application for

supervisory writs, grant the writ application, vacate the September 30, 2024 Ruling

of the Court, and remand this case to the 19" JDC for further proceedings in

accordance with this judgment. We further grant LDENR' s April 7, 2025 motion

to supplement the record.

Devon Energy Production Company, L.P. (" Devon"), through multiple

predecessors, conducted oil and gas operations and obtained Coastal Use Permits

CUPs") at various times between 1974 and 2002 in three oil fields att issue in this

matter: Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake. These oil fields and all

associated CUPs are located in Cameron Parish, Louisiana.

Cameron Parish Lawsuits

In 2016, Cameron Parish filed eleven lawsuits (" Cameron Parish Lawsuits")

in the 38' Judicial District Court against current and former oil and gas exploration

operators in Cameron Parish, including three lawsuits2 against Devon and other

defendants regarding coastal land loss and related CUPs. Cameron Parish alleged

that land loss is markedly higher at Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake

because Devon and other defendants engaged in activities that violated their CUPS

2 On January 25, 2024, LDENR filed its combined findings of fact and conclusions of law,
listing the following relevant lawsuits:

1) Parish of Cameron v. Alpine Exploration Companies Inc., et al, Suit No. 10-
19580 ( relating to Mallard Bay);

2) Parish of Cameron v. Anadarko E& P Onshore, LLC, et al, Suit No. 10- 19578
relating to Crab Lake);

3) Parish of Cameron v. Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Co., L.P., et al, Suit
No. 10- 19575 ( relating to Deep Lake).

3

or the State and Local Coastal Resources Management Act, located at La. R.S.

214. 21, et seq. (" SLCRMA"). LDENR and the Louisiana Attorney General

A.G.") subsequently intervened as plaintiffs in the Cameron Parish Lawsuits.

Devon' s Letters to LDENR Requesting Declaratory Rulin s

While the Cameron Parish Lawsuits were ongoing, Devon sent three letters

to LDENR regarding its past operations in the three fields at issue. In these letters

dated July 30, 2019, November 13, 2019, and January 14, 2020 — Devon

requested that LDENR issue declaratory rulings that Louisiana' s Rules and

Procedures for CUPs did not apply to any activity conducted by Devon and/ or its

predecessors in Mallard Bay Field, Crab Lake Field, and Deep Lake Field.' In the

alternative, Devon requested that LDENR ( 1) identify with specificity the

violations of the CUPS, statutes, or regulations that LDENR alleges Devon to have

committed in each field, and ( 2) provide a compliance schedule that particularly

identifies the actions that Devon must take to come into compliance with those

permits, statutes, or regulations within a reasonable time.

LDENR did not respond to Devon' s requests. According to LDENR, it

chose to intervene in the lawsuits instead because " it was more efficient than

instituting potentially thousands of administrative actions for enforcement in these

cases." LDENR considers the Cameron Parish Lawsuits to be its enforcement

proceedings regarding Devon' s CUPs in Mallard Bay, Crab Lake, and Deep Lake.

Devon' s Mandamus Action and the 2022 Mandamus Judgment

When LDENR did not respond to Devon' s requests, Devon filed a petition

for writ of mandamus in the 19th JDC on September 2, 2020, seeking an order

requiring LDENR and its secretary, Thomas Harris, to respond to each of those

3 Devon asserts that it sought specific declaratory rulings from LDENR pursuant to LDENR' s
regulations and Louisiana' s Administrative Procedure Act. See La. R.S. 49: 950, et seq.

0

requests.' On August 24, 2022, following an August 10, 2022 hearing on the

which ( 1)
matter, the 19" JDC signed a judgment (" 2022 Mandamus Judgment")

granted Devon' s petition for writ of mandamus; ( 2) made peremptory an

Alternative Writ of Mandamus and Order" issued on September 3, 2020; and ( 3)

issued a writ of mandamus pursuant to La. Code Civ. P. art. 3 86 1, et seq., ordering

and directing LDENR to issue or cause to be issued declaratory rulings or, in the
alternative, compliance schedules as sought by Devon in its requests for

declaratory rulings submitted on July 31, 2019, November 13, 2019, and January

14, 2020. 5 LDENR did not appeal the 2022 Mandamus Judgment.

Pursuant to the 2022 Mandamus Judgment, LDENR held a public hearing in

Cameron, Louisiana on November 14, 2022, which was followed by a public

comment period.

LDENR' s 2022 Declaratory Order

On December 15, 2022, LDENR issued a Declaratory Order (" 2022

Declaratory Order") pursuant to the 2022 Mandamus Judgment. In the 2022

Declaratory Order, the Secretary of LDENR summarized Devon' s oil and gas

activities in Cameron, as well as the resulting Cameron Parish Lawsuits in which

LDENR and the A.G. intervened on the side of Cameron Parish. LDENR asserted

that the records submitted by Devon did not address all of the issues raised by the

apparent land loss. LDENR further found that there were little to no records of the

activities of other operators who worked in the fields at issue, rendering it

impossible to allocate responsibility among the various potentially responsible

parties. LDENR concluded that it could not " exonerate Devon from responsibility

or quantify its relative responsibility, if any" and further could not " determine

4 Devon' s September 2, 2020 petition for writ of mandamus was allotted to Judge Wilson E.
Fields, Suit No. 699, 354, Division 25.

5 The 19th JDC ordered LDENR to issue its rulings and/ or compliance schedules on or before
December 14, 2022.

5

effective compliance schedules." As a result, LDENR declared its intent to seek

resolution of those issues in the pending Cameron Parish Lawsuits.

Devon' s Petition for Judicial Review of the 2022 Declaratory Order and the

February 15, 2024 Judgment

On December 27, 2022, Devon filed a petition for judicial review of the

2022 Declaratory Order in the 19" JDC, alleging that the 2022 Declaratory Order

violated the 2022 Mandamus Judgment and Louisiana' s Administrative Procedure

Acta Specifically, Devon alleged that the 2022 Declaratory Order violated its

equal protection and due process rights and was made upon unlawful procedure,

not supported by a preponderance of the evidence, and arbitrary and capricious.7

This matter was set for a bench trial on January 26, 2024.8 On February 15,

2024, following the bench trial, the trial court rendered judgment (" February 15,
LDENR9 "
2024 Judgment") in favor of Devon and ordered the Secretary of to

comply with the final judgment on Writ of Mandamus and issue decree( s) or

alternatively compliance order( s) ... solely relying on the existing record before

the Secretary."

In reasons for judgment signed the same date, the trial court stated that

Devon was seeking review of a document issued by LDENR that contained no

decretal language and further contained no orders issued in response to the 2022

Mandamus Judgment. The trial court returned the matter to LDENR and ordered

LDENR to comply with the 2022 Mandamus Judgment and issue a decree or

6 Devon' s petition for judicial review of the 2022 Declaratory Order was allotted to Judge
Tiffany Foxworth-Roberts, Suit No. 727086, Division 31.

7 LDENR subsequently filed an application for supervisory writs with this Court as to the denial
of exceptions it had raised to Devon' s petition. However, LDENR' s writ application was
untimely and therefore not considered. See Devon Energy Protluction Company, L.P. v.
Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, 2023- 0678 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 9/ 11/ 23), 2023 WL
5843576 ( unreported).

8 Although this matter was allotted to Judge Foxworth-Roberts, Judge James E. Kuhn presided
ad hoc over the January 26, 2024 hearing.

9 Supra, footnote 1.

0

compliance order. Ultimately, the trial court did not decide any legal issues in the

February 15, 2024 judgment.

LDENR' s 2024 Declaratory Ruli!ig

On April 1, 2024, LDENR issued a Declaratory Ruling (" 2024 Declaratory

Ruling") in response to the February 15, 2024 Judgment. In the 2024 Declaratory

Ruling, LDENR ruled as follows: ( 1) LDENR will not issue compliance schedules;

2) all statutes governing state and local coastal resources apply to Devon' s CUPs;

3) LDENR " rules in favor of Devon" and " will not open an administrative

enforcement action against Devon at this time"; and ( 4) LDENR will maintain its

intervention in the Cameron Parish lawsuits.

Devon' s April 22, 2024 Motion for Contempt and the September 30, 2024

Ruling of the Court

Relevantly, on April 22, 2024, Devon filed a motion for contempt, alleging

that LDENR' s issuance of the 2024 Declaratory Ruling did not satisfy or comply

with the 2022 Mandamus Judgment or the February 15, 2024 Judgment. Devon

asserted that it had filed a petition for judicial review of LDENR' s 2024

Declaratory Ruling, which was assigned Docket No. 746842.

Devon' s motion for contempt —the only matter set for hearing on this date —

was heard by the trial court on August 7, 2024. 10 At this hearing, LDENR argued

that Devon' s arguments rely on issues centered in the administrative appeal, which

has not been substantively resolved. LDENR further asserted that a second

administrative appeal was pending.

On September 30, 2024, the trial court issued a judgment (" September 30,

2024 Ruling of the Court") ordering LDENR to issue specific declaratory rulings

in response to each item in Devon' s Requests within 30 days, ordering Devon to

10
By this date, Judge Foxworth- Roberts had resumed her role as the presiding judge in this
matter.

VA

issue a compliance schedule, and deferring a ruling on contempt. Notice of the

written judgment was mailed to the parties' counsels on October 2, 2024.

On October 25, 2024, LDENR electronically -filed a motion for suspensive

appeal of the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court. On November 4, 2024,

Devon filed an opposition to LDENR' s motion for suspensive appeal, arguing that

the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court is an interlocutory judgment that is not

appealable.' 1 Likewise, on March 7, 2025, Devon filed a motion to dismiss the

appeal based upon the same argument. LDENR filed an opposition to Devon' s

motion to dismiss on March 14, 2025.

MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT

On April 7, 2025, LDENR filed a motion to supplement the appellate record

with the written reasons for judgment issued by the trial court in connection with

the February 15, 2024 Judgment.

Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure article 2132 provides:

A record on appeal which is incorrect or contains misstatements,
irregularities or informalities, or which omits a material part of the
trial record, may be corrected even after the record is transmitted to
the appellate court, by the parties by stipulation, by the trial court or
by the order of the appellate court. All other questions as to the
content and form of the record shall be presented to the appellate
court.

Although appellate courts review judgments, not reasons for judgments, written

reasons for judgment are an explication of the trial court' s determinations. See

Wooley v. Lucksinger, 2009- 0571 ( La. 4/ 1/ 11), 61 So. 3d 507, 572. Accordingly,

we grant LDENR' s April 7, 2025 motion to supplement the appellate record with

the written reasons for judgment associated with the February 15, 2024 Judgment.

MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

In its March 7, 2025 motion to dismiss LDENR' s appeal, Devon asserts that

the September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court is an unappealable, interlocutory

11 Devon also asserted LDENR did not appeal the February 15, 2024 Judgment.

judgment. This court' s appellate jurisdiction only extends to final judgments.

Jones v. Fogg, 2024- 1048 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 5/ 30/ 25), 413 So.3d 580, 583, reh' g

denied, Aug. 6, 2025. A final judgment is appealable in all cases in which appeals

are given by law, while an interlocutory judgment is appealable only when

expressly provided by law. La. Code Civ. P. art. 2083; Jones, 413 So.3d at 583.

An interlocutory judgment does not determine the merits, but only preliminary

matters in the course of the action, while a final judgment determines the merits in

whole or in part. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1841; Jones, 413 So. 3d at 583.

The September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court does not determine the

substantive merits of the case and is therefore an interlocutory judgment. See

Suazo v. Suazo, 2010- 0111 ( La. App. 1 Cir. 6/ 11/ 10), 39 So. 3d 830, 832. The

proper procedural vehicle to contest an interlocutory judgment is an application for

supervisory writs. La. Code Civ. P. art. 2201; Prepotente v. Williams, 2024- 0906

La. App. 1 Cir. 2/ 21/ 25), 406 So. 3d 641, 643. When a party improperly appeals a

non -appealable interlocutory judgment, this court has discretion to convert that

appeal to an application for supervisory writs; however, this court may only do so

if the appeal would have been timely had it been filed as a supervisory writ

application. Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. A supervisory writ application must be

filed within thirty days of the notice of judgment. See Uniform Rules — Courts of

Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3; Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643.

When an interlocutory judgment is rendered in open court, its rendition

constitutes notice to all parties, unless certain exceptions apply. La. Code Civ. P.

art. 1914( A); Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. The pertinent exceptions are if the trial

court orders that an interlocutory judgment be reduced to writing, or if the trial

court takes the interlocutory matter under advisement, or if a party requests that the

interlocutory judgment be reduced to writing within ten days of its rendition in

open court. La. Code Civ. P. art. 1914( B); Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643. In such

L"

cases, the interlocutory judgment shall be reduced to writing, the trial court clerk

shall mail notice of the written judgment to each party, and the 30 -day delay for

filing a writ application begins from the date of the mailing of the notice. See La.

C. C. P. art. 1914( B); Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3;

Prepotente, 406 So. 3d 643- 44.

In the instant case, notice of the written judgment was mailed on October 2,

2024. LDENR filed a motion for suspensive appeal on October 28, 2024, which

is within 30 days of the mailing of the notice of written judgment. -.Because the

appeal would have been timely had it been filed as a supervisory writ application,

this Court has discretion to convert the appeal to an application for supervisory
writs. See Uniform Rules — Courts of Appeal, Rules 4- 2 and 4- 3; Prelgotente, 406

So. 3d 643. Accordingly, we exercise our discretion to convert the appeal to an

application for supervisory writs.

The only matter set for hearing on August 7, 2024 was Devon' s motion for

contempt. Rather than rule on the motion for contempt, the trial court issued a

number of orders regarding certain declaratory rulings to be issued by LDENR and

a compliance schedule to be issued by Devon. Being that the motion for contempt

was not addressed by the trial court, we vacate the September 30, 2024 Ruling of

the Court and remand this matter for a contempt hearing.
DECREE

For the above and foregoing reasons, we convert the appeal of the

September 30, 2024 Ruling of the Court filed by the Louisiana Department of

Energy and Natural Resources to an application for supervisory writs. We grant
the writ application, vacate the September 30,
2024 Ruling of the Court, and

remand the matter to the trial court for a contempt hearing. We also grant the April
7,
2025 motion to supplement the record filed by the Louisiana Department of

Energy and Natural Resources. Costs of the appeal in the amount of $5, 110. 00 are

Of

to be split equally by the parties, with 50% of appeal costs being assessed to the

Louisiana Department of Energy and Natural Resources, and 50% of appeal costs

being assessed to Devon Energy Production Company, L.P.

MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT GRANTED; APPEAL CONVERTED
TO APPLICATION FOR SUPERVISORY WRITS; WRIT GRANTED;
SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 RULING OF THE COURT VACATED;
REMANDED TO THE DISTRICT COURT WITH INSTRUCTIONS.

11