Delay in filing suit too often spells doom for the plaintiff, as we learn in Zadeck Succession et al v. Treme et al.
Treme (as in the family collectively) claimed their father, Vandiver, was conveyed a 5% working...more
The question in Brooke-Willbanks v. Flatland Mineral Fund LP, et al was which party to a Texas mineral deed would bear the burden of two previously reserved nonparticipating royalty interests....more
The question in Kim R. Smith Logging Inc. v. Indigo Minerals LLC was whether a disgruntled Louisiana royalty owner sent its demand for unpaid royalties to the right party. It turns out that it did....more
Precious little legal analysis is required to grasp the lesson from Springbok Royalty Partners v. Cook. No mode or manner of legal gymnastics is likely to save parties from the legal effect of a contract they didn’t bother...more
Let’s begin with some Texas law on what a seller sells when he executes a deed:
Generally, a Texas real property deed will confer upon the grantee the greatest estate as the terms of the instrument will permit. This...more
Wagner v. Exxon Mobil Corporation is an example of the misfortune that can befall the purchaser who assumes the burden of comprehensive, one-sided indemnity obligations. We will disregard evidentiary and other issues in this...more
Let’s begin with a quiz. Armour purchases non-recourse mortgage notes, becoming a lienholder in 99 oil and gas leases and 13 wells; fails to record the transfer documents in the real property records; assigns the leases to...more
This seems to be the season for oil patch courts to return property to its rightful owners. Last week it was a regulatory taking by the City of Dallas. This week it is Northwest Landowners Association v. State of North...more
You might recall this post on Broadway National Bank, Trustee v. Yates Energy Corporation. We now have Yates Energy Corporation et al v. Broadway National Bank, Trustee, the court of appeals’ ruling after remand. Recall the...more
Withrow v. Chevron is another Louisiana legacy lawsuit, this one claiming that defendants Chevron and Vernon E. Faulconer, Inc., and their predecessors, improperly disposed of toxic and hazardous oilfield wastes in unlined...more
8/10/2022
/ Chevron ,
Contaminated Properties ,
Hazardous Waste ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Mineral Rights ,
Negligence ,
Nuisance ,
Oil & Gas ,
Site Remediation ,
Tort ,
Trespass
Those who continue to be horrified by Broadway National Bank, Trustee v. Yates Energy Corp. should be relieved that the result in Endeavor Energy Resources, LP v. Anderson was more equitable. In Yates, the Texas Supreme Court...more
The question presented in Aaron v. Fisher et al: Did mineral deeds bestow separate property upon the grantees by gift, or did they convey a community property interest to the grantees and their spouses by sale for...more
Recall our recent post on Carl v. Hilcorp Energy Company from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas discussing the lessee’s royalty obligations on gas used off the premises in a market-value lease. See...more
The question is presented again but in a different format: In Texas is a lessee allowed to deduct post-production costs (PPC’s) from the lessor’s gas royalty? In Carl v. Hilcorp, the answer was “yes” based on the language in...more
If perpetuation of a mineral lease beyond the primary term is contingent upon continuous operations, do traditional notions of “production in paying quantities” always matter? Spoiler: No....more
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. International Development Corporation resolved the question, In a 100 year old Pennsylvania deed is a “subject to” provision an exception to a grant or a warranty disclaimer?...more
It was jurisprudential Groundhog Day as the Supreme Court of Texas handed down Nettye Engler Energy v. Bluestone Natural Resources, another in a series of postproduction cost disputes, only two days after Puxsutawney Phil...more
The baseball season might be in jeopardy, but litigants are swinging for the fences. In Mary v. QEP Energy, the parties entered into a Pipelins Servitude Agreement over Ms. Mary’s 160 acres. One of QEP’s pipelines extended...more
The Texas Supreme Court has granted petition for review of a 2019 decision in Dyer et al v. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality . At issue is whether rescission of a Railroad Commission no-harm letter before the TCEQ...more
How many different meanings can parties attribute to a term in an oil and gas lease? Answer: As many as they want, but the court will only use one, says King Operating et al v. Double Eagle Andrews, LLC et al....more
Sometimes writing too many alternatives into an oil and gas lease invites confusion … which provokes litigation … which results in disappointment for somebody … or everybody. ...more
Lollygag: To fool around and waste time; dawdle. As in, “I lollygagged for 15 years after filing my suit and obtained a less-than-optimal result.”...more
Regency Field Services LLC v. Swift Energy Operating LLC, draws one’s attention to the difficult analyses that should be made before bringing a subsurface trespass claim....more
Howard, et al. v. Matterhorn Energy, LLC, et al. [6th Dist.] May 4, 2021 considered the Texas Citizens Participation Act as amended, effective on September 1, 2019....more
In Apache Corp. v. Hill, et al., lessors prevailed in a lease construction dispute because of the court’s unsurprising conclusion that a typewritten addendum to oil and gas leases superseded conflicting provisions in the...more