Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies Commitments During the first nine months of 2014, the Company entered into drilling rig contracts with total expected commitments of $110.5 million and varying terms extending through 2016. As of September 30, 2014, the remaining expected drilling commitments totaled $72.3 million. Early termination of the remaining contracts would result in penalties totaling $42.5 million as of September 30, 2014. Subsequent to September 30, 2014, the Company entered into additional drilling rig contracts with future expected commitments totaling $24.5 million, and varying terms extending through 2016. Early termination of these contracts would result in penalties totaling $14.4 million. During the third quarter of 2014, as part of the Gooseneck prospect acquisition described in Note 3 - Acquisitions, Divestitures, and Assets Held for Sale, the Company assumed a share of the seller’s rights and obligations under a gas purchase agreement whereby the Company is subject to certain through-put commitments extending through 2028. The Company may be required to make periodic deficiency payments for any shortfalls in delivering the minimum applicable annual volume commitment. In the event that no product is delivered in accordance with this agreement, the undiscounted aggregate deficiency payments totaled approximately $24.4 million as of September 30, 2014. Subsequent to September 30, 2014, the Company closed an acquisition resulting in an increase it its obligations under this gas purchase agreement. As of the filing date of this report, in the event that no product is delivered in accordance with this agreement, the undiscounted aggregate deficiency payments total approximately $42.6 million. The Company expects to deliver at least the minimum applicable annual volumes under this agreement. Contingencies The Company is subject to litigation and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues for such items when a liability is both probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion of management, the results of such pending litigation and claims will not have a material effect on the results of operations, the financial position, or the cash flows of the Company. On April 16, 2014, the Company settled its previously disclosed litigation against Endeavour Operating Corporation (“Endeavour”). The Company, its working interest partners, and Endeavour agreed to mutually release all claims and dismiss the lawsuit in exchange for certain cash payments and other consideration paid to the Company and its working interest partners by Endeavour. The Company recorded a $10.7 million gain in the other operating revenues line item in the accompanying statements of operations in the second quarter of 2014 relating to this settlement. On January 27, 2011, Chieftain Royalty Company (“Chieftain”) filed a Class Action Petition against the Company in the District Court of Beaver County, Oklahoma, claiming damages related to royalty payments on all of the Oklahoma oil and gas wells operated by the Company and its predecessors. These claims include breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, unjust enrichment, tortious breach of contract, conspiracy, and conversion, based generally on asserted improper deduction of post-production costs. The Company removed this lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma on February 22, 2011. The Company responded to the petition and denied the allegations. The district court did not rule on Chieftain’s motion to certify the putative class, and stayed all proceedings until the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued its rulings on class certification in two similar royalty class action lawsuits. On July 9, 2013, the Tenth Circuit issued its opinions, reversing the trial courts’ grant of class certification and remanding the matters to the trial courts for those cases. The district court presiding over the Company’s case subsequently lifted its stay, and the Company now expects Chieftain to file a new motion for class certification in the first half of 2016. This case involves complex legal issues and uncertainties; a potentially large class of plaintiffs, and a large number of related producing properties, lease agreements and wells; and an alleged class period commencing in 1988 and spanning the entire producing life of the wells. Because the proceedings are in the early stages, with discovery yet to be completed, the Company is unable to estimate what impact, if any, the action will have on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. The Company is still evaluating the claims, but believes that it has properly paid royalties under Oklahoma law and has and will continue to vigorously defend this case. On December 30, 2013, the Company sold a substantial portion of the assets that were subject to this matter and the buyer assumed any such liabilities related to such properties.

Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments

During the first nine months of 2014, the Company entered into drilling rig contracts with total expected commitments of $110.5 million and varying terms extending through 2016. As of September 30, 2014, the remaining expected drilling commitments totaled $72.3 million. Early termination of the remaining contracts would result in penalties totaling $42.5 million as of September 30, 2014. Subsequent to September 30, 2014, the Company entered into additional drilling rig contracts with future expected commitments totaling $24.5 million, and varying terms extending through 2016. Early termination of these contracts would result in penalties totaling $14.4 million.

During the third quarter of 2014, as part of the Gooseneck prospect acquisition described in Note 3 - Acquisitions, Divestitures, and Assets Held for Sale, the Company assumed a share of the seller’s rights and obligations under a gas purchase agreement whereby the Company is subject to certain through-put commitments extending through 2028. The Company may be required to make periodic deficiency payments for any shortfalls in delivering the minimum applicable annual volume commitment. In the event that no product is delivered in accordance with this agreement, the undiscounted aggregate deficiency payments totaled approximately $24.4 million as of September 30, 2014. Subsequent to September 30, 2014, the Company closed an acquisition resulting in an increase it its obligations under this gas purchase agreement. As of the filing date of this report, in the event that no product is delivered in accordance with this agreement, the undiscounted aggregate deficiency payments total approximately $42.6 million. The Company expects to deliver at least the minimum applicable annual volumes under this agreement.

Contingencies

The Company is subject to litigation and claims arising in the ordinary course of business. The Company accrues for such items when a liability is both probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. In the opinion of management, the results of such pending litigation and claims will not have a material effect on the results of operations, the financial position, or the cash flows of the Company.

On April 16, 2014, the Company settled its previously disclosed litigation against Endeavour Operating Corporation (“Endeavour”). The Company, its working interest partners, and Endeavour agreed to mutually release all claims and dismiss the lawsuit in exchange for certain cash payments and other consideration paid to the Company and its working interest partners by Endeavour. The Company recorded a $10.7 million gain in the other operating revenues line item in the accompanying statements of operations in the second quarter of 2014 relating to this settlement.

On January 27, 2011, Chieftain Royalty Company (“Chieftain”) filed a Class Action Petition against the Company in the District Court of Beaver County, Oklahoma, claiming damages related to royalty payments on all of the Oklahoma oil and gas wells operated by the Company and its predecessors. These claims include breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, fraud, unjust enrichment, tortious breach of contract, conspiracy, and conversion, based generally on asserted improper deduction of post-production costs. The Company removed this lawsuit to the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma on February 22, 2011. The Company responded to the petition and denied the allegations. The district court did not rule on Chieftain’s motion to certify the putative class, and stayed all proceedings until the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued its rulings on class certification in two similar royalty class action lawsuits. On July 9, 2013, the Tenth Circuit issued its opinions, reversing the trial courts’ grant of class certification and remanding the matters to the trial courts for those cases. The district court presiding over the Company’s case subsequently lifted its stay, and the Company now expects Chieftain to file a new motion for class certification in the first half of 2016.

This case involves complex legal issues and uncertainties; a potentially large class of plaintiffs, and a large number of related producing properties, lease agreements and wells; and an alleged class period commencing in 1988 and spanning the entire producing life of the wells. Because the proceedings are in the early stages, with discovery yet to be completed, the Company is unable to estimate what impact, if any, the action will have on its financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. The Company is still evaluating the claims, but believes that it has properly paid royalties under Oklahoma law and has and will continue to vigorously defend this case. On December 30, 2013, the Company sold a substantial portion of the assets that were subject to this matter and the buyer assumed any such liabilities related to such properties.