Hanna and Morton

Los Angeles Office
213•430•2516 [Direct]

Edward S. Renwick


Edward S. Renwick
(A Professional Corporation)

Areas of Practice
  • Trials and Appeals
  • Assistance in resolving and avoiding disputes
  • Transactions
  • Consulting with other lawyers who are confronted with oil and gas issues but lack industry experience 
  • Serving as settlement counsel in cases being tried by other lawyers
Skill Based Expertise
  • Complex trials and appeals
  • Administrative and legislative advocacy
  • Negotiations
  • Settling disputes
  • Problem solving
Subject Matter Expertise
  • Petroleum industry issues
    • Upstream
    • Midstream
    • Downstream
  • Renewable and alternative energy issues
  • Environmental problems
  • Alternative dispute resolution
  • Natural resources issues
  • Trusts and estates law
  • General business issues
Experience and Judgment
Fifty active years of experience helping sophisticated clients solve serious problems
Bar Admissions
  • California 1959
  • U.S. District Court (Southern, Central, Northern and Eastern Districts of California)
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Cir.
  • U.S. Supreme Court
  • Stanford University School of Law (LL.B. 1958)
  • Stanford University (A.B., 1956)


Edward S. Renwick’s substantive specialty is oil, gas and natural resources law. As such he has tried numerous cases, argued many appeals, represented clients before administrative and legislative bodies, helped clients settle and avoid disputes, acted as a mediator and counseled clients in transactional matters.  He also consults with other attorneys and law firms who are confronted with oil and gas issues but lack oil and gas industry experience

Mr. Renwick has also developed a powerful system for reducing the cost of litigation without sacrificing the quality of representation or increasing the risk of adverse results.  It is predicated on four principles.

  1. At least 95% of all cases settle before trial, but generally only after spending a great deal of money on discovery.  If lawyers can identify those that will settle and reach early settlement, clients will cut their litigation costs dramatically.
  2. In order to settle cases quickly, lawyers must be able to calculate settlement values long before completing discovery.
  3. In any significant case, the settlement function should be separated from the litigation function. Rare is the lawyer that simultaneously can do a good job as an aggressive warrior pushing a case to trial and a diplomatic negotiator pushing for early settlement.
  4. Clients should pay for completed tasks, not hours spent.


Mr. Renwick has over fifty years of experience in the oil and gas industry including upstream, midstream and downstream work. Additionally, his energy experience extends to geothermal resources as well as alternative and renewable energy issues. He has environmental experience including contaminated property, contaminated groundwater, air quality, CERCLA, RCRA and toxic torts. He also has natural resources experience including groundwater adjudication, land and mineral titles, zoning, and land use. In addition, he has handled cases involving contract disputes, constitutional issues, antitrust law, partnership accounting, trusts and estates, income taxation and property taxation.

From 1973 through 1991, in addition to maintaining his law practice, Mr. Renwick served as vice president and general counsel of a California independent oil and gas company and represented that company on the Legal Committee of the Western Oil and Gas Association and its successor, the Western States Petroleum Association.

Since 1974, Mr. Renwick has been a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, to which admission is offered selectively, by invitation only and is limited to not more than one percent of the lawyers who are licensed to practice in a state. He is active in the American Bar Association, where he was Chairman of the Section of Natural Resources, Energy and Environmental Law for the year 1987-1988. He is also a member of the Antitrust Law, Business Law and Litigation Sections and a Fellow of the American Bar. He is a member of Phi Delta Phi legal fraternity; was a member of the Board of Visitors, Stanford Law School (1967-1969); was a member of the California Delegation (Legal Committee) of the Interstate Oil Compact Commission; serves on the Advisory Board of The Institute for Energy Law of the Center for American and International Law in Dallas, Texas; and serves on the Board of the California Supreme Court Historical Society. He is a member of the Los Angeles County Bar Association where he was Chairman of the Natural Resources Law Section (1974-1975), and is a member of the Chancery Club (Los Angeles) where he served as President in 1992-1993. He is listed in Marquis Who's Who in America; Marquis Who's Who in the World; Marquis Who's Who in American Law; Marquis Who's Who in the West and was named as a Southern California Super Lawyer in the category of energy law by Law and Politics.


Reported CasesMardikian v. Menick (1960) 185 Cal.App.2d 664 (Dispute over partnership accounting); Rohrig v. Whiteman Mfg Co. (1963)219 Cal.App.2d 116 (contract dispute); Bank of America Nat'l Trust & Sav. Assoc. v. Hutchinson (1963) 212 Cal.App.2d 142 (Fraud by bank manager); McCullough v. Commissioner, 326 F.2d 199 (1964) (Taxation of patent proceeds); Kraemer v. The Superior Oil Company (1966) 240 Cal.App.2d 642 (Boundary line dispute); Atlantic Oil Company v. County of Los Angeles (1968) 69 Cal.2d 585 (Ad valorem taxes on oil properties); Union Pacific R.R. Co. v. City of Long Beach (1972) 24 Cal.App.3d 594 (business license tax); No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1975) 13 Cal.3d 486 (Challenge to application of California Environmental Policy Act); Atlantic Richfield Company v. County of Los Angeles (1977) 68 Cal.App.3d 105 (Ad valorem taxes on oil properties); Great Lakes Properties, Inc. v. El Segundo (1977) 19 Cal.3d 152 (Right of prevailing defendant to recover attorney fees under statute); Union Oil Company of California v. South Coast Regional Commission (1979) 92 Cal.App.3d 327 (Coastal permit not needed to repair oil terminal dock); Getty Oil Company v. Cecil D. Andrus, et al, 433 F.Supp. 1317(1977), 607 F.2d 253 (1979)(geothermal leases on federal land); Atlantic Richfield Company v. County of Los Angeles (1982) 129 Cal.App.3d 287 (Ad valorem taxes on oil properties); In re Coordinated Pretrial Proceedings in Petroleum Products Antitrust Litigation 691 F.2d 1335 (1982) (Multi-district anti-trust case); No Oil, Inc. v. City of Los Angeles (1984)153 Cal.App.3d 998 (Whether excessive delay cuts off right of prevailing party to claim attorney fees); Lynch v. State Board of Equalization (1985) 164 Cal.App.3d 94 (Multi-County challenge to State Board of Equalization rules); Tenneco West Inc. v. Marathon Oil Company 756 F.2d 769 (1985) (Excess profits tax dispute); County of Sonoma v. State Energy Resources Conservation etc. Commission 40 Cal.3d 361 (1985) (Constitutional issue: Validity of statute providing that only California Supreme Court can review decision of Energy Commission); Aminoil, Inc. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency 646 F.Supp. 294 (1986) (Successful constitutional attack on CERCLA); Shell Oil Company v. Santa Monica 830 F.2d 1052 (1987) (Constitutional issue: Commerce Clause); Western Oil and Gas Association v. California State Board of Equalization (1985) 192 Cal.App.3d 127: 1985 Cal.App. LEXIS 2555; (1987) 44 Cal.3d 208 (Challenge to information demands by SBOE); Aminoil, Inc. v. Superior Court (1988) 205 Cal.App.3d 850, 252 Cal.Rptr. 658: 1988 Cal.App. LEXIS 1020 (Peremptory challenge to Judge); Carrier Corporation v Detrex Corporation (1992) 4 Cal.App.4th 1522 (Ground water contamination); Oryx Energy Company v. County of Kern (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 48 (Ad valorem taxes on oil properties); Southern Pacific Pipelines, Inc. v. State Board of Equalization (1993) 14 Cal.App.4th 42 (Ad valorem taxes on inter-county pipelines); Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Superior Court of Sutter County (Anacapa Oil Corporation, Real Party in Interest) (1993) 15 Cal.App.4th 576 (Scope of judicial review of arbitration award); Magness Petroleum Co v. Warren Resources of California, Inc, et. al. (2002) 103 Cal.App.4th 901 (Dispute over proper venue for arbitration); Estate of Odessa Marie Howard v. Union Oil Company of California (2008) Cal.App.Lexis 4715.
Back to Attorneys