La. R.S. » RS
Louisiana Revised Statutes & Codes

La. Rev. Stat. § 31:22 (2026)

Certain rights and obligations of mineral servitude owner

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section LA-LEGlegis.la.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

§22.  Certain rights and obligations of mineral servitude owner

The owner of a mineral servitude is under no obligation to exercise it.  If he does, he is entitled to use only so much of the land as is reasonably necessary to conduct his operations.  He is obligated, insofar as practicable, to restore the surface to its original condition at the earliest reasonable time.

Acts 1974, No. 50, §1, eff. Jan. 1, 1975.  

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 24 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: MJ Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 998 So. 2d 16 (La. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
MJ Farms, Ltd. v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 998 So. 2d 16 (La. 2008). · cites it 9× “Farms further particularized a claim for restoration of its property as provided in La.Rev.Stat. § 31:22, [3] La. Civ.Code art.”
Wagoner v. Chevron USA Inc., 55 So. 3d 12 (La. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 4× “R.S. 31:22. He is obligated, insofar as practicable, to restore the surface to its original condition at the earliest reasonable time.”
Alford v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., 13 F. Supp. 3d 581 (E.D. La. 2014). · cites it 4× “” La.Rev.Stat. § 31:22. b. Defendants’ Obligations as Servitude Holders Plaintiffs never allege in their complaint that Chevron held a mineral servitude on the property in question, and none of the documents attached to plaintiffs’ complaint suggests that Chevron ever owned such…”
Walton v. Burns, 151 So. 3d 616 (La. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 4× “They added, however, the legal theory that under the Mineral Code, R.S. 31:22, the owner of the mineral servitude is obligated, “insofar as practicable, to restore the surface to its original eondition[.”
LEJEUNE BROS. v. Goodrich Petroleum Co., 981 So. 2d 23 (La. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “R.S. 31:22 and the conveyance of a sale which conveyed all of the vendor's rights.”
Corbello v. Iowa Prod., 850 So. 2d 686 (La. 2003). “R.S. 31:22 (comments). Plaintiffs counter that this case is governed by the principle that "the contract is the law between the parties.”
Dupree v. Oil, Gas & Other Minerals, 731 So. 2d 1067 (La. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 4× “R.S. 31:22 mandates this obligation, we reverse summary judgment and remand this case to the trial court.”
Terrebonne Sch. Bd. v. Castex Energy, 893 So. 2d 789 (La. 2005). “[2] But see Mineral Code article 22, LSA-R.S. 31:22, regarding the obligation of a mineral servitude owner, as opposed to a mineral lessee, which states: The owner of a mineral servitude is under no obligation to exercise it.”
Crooks v. Louisiana Pac. Corp., 155 So. 3d 686 (La. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “R.S. 31:22, a mineral servitude owner can “use only so much of the land as is reasonably necessary to conduct his operations” and “[h]e is obligated, insofar as practicable, to restore the surface to its original conditioh at the earliest reasonable time.”
Black River Crawfish Farms, LLC v. King, 246 So. 3d 1 (La. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 2× “R.S. 31:22 (hereinafter "Article 22") for the contamination of its property resulting from historical oil and gas exploration activities.”
Butler v. Baber, 529 So. 2d 374 (La. 1988). “Thus, the principle of article 22 may be applied by analogy to resolve disputes between mineral lessees and competing surface users deriving their rights from the land owner.”
Texaco Inc. v. Louisiana Land & Expl. Co., 136 B.R. 658 (M.D. La. 1992). “” LSA-R.S. 31:22. Although the servitude owner may himself explore or grant a mineral lease to another, he is under no compulsion to do so.”
Show all 24 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.