Copano Energy, LLC v. Stanley Bujnoch, Life Estate, et al. asked whether an enforceable easement had been established by email. The trial court and court of appeal said yes, holding in favor of landowner the Bujnochs....more
It is no surprise to Texas Supreme Court watchers that in Energy Transfer Partners et al v. Enterprise Products Partners LP et al. the court rejected claims that the parties had created a partnership by actions that varied...more
2/11/2020
/ Business Disputes ,
Business Formation ,
Condition Precedent ,
Construction Project ,
Contract Disputes ,
Contract Negotiations ,
Contract Terms ,
Energy Projects ,
Oil & Gas ,
Partnership Agreements ,
Partnerships ,
Pipelines ,
TX Supreme Court
In Barrow-Shaver Resources Company v. Carrizo Oil & Gas, Inc the Supreme Court of Texas has held again, here in a consent-to-assign dispute, that a contract means what the words say, even if in negotiations a landman said...more
Welcome to today’s grab-bag of unrelated topics.
The climate avengers are clever in the way they demonize the industry. They give zero credit for technological advancement. Truth is, the industry’s use of technology is...more
In resolving disputes among the mineral interest family, there is no bright-line rule delineating the duty of the executive right holder. In Texas Outfitters Limited v. Nicholson, the Texas Supreme Court explained why. The...more
Burlington Resources Oil & Gas Company, LP. v. Texas Crude Energy, LLC et al is another chapter in the back-and-forth over deduction of post-production costs from royalty payments....more
In another dispute over insurance coverage related to the Macondo Well blowout (a/k/a Deep Water Horizon incident),1 the Texas Supreme Court held that an endorsement reducing a policy’s limits for “liability” stemming from a...more
2/6/2019
/ BP ,
Duty to Defend ,
Indemnification ,
Insurance Claims ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Joint Venture ,
Liability ,
Oil & Gas ,
Policy Limits ,
Policy Terms ,
TX Supreme Court ,
Well Drilling
Local, often rural taxing authorities frequently look to out-of-towners to bear what the locals consider the outsiders’ fair share of the burdens of increased oil and gas activity. ...more
In a ruling that could benefit mineral owners who don’t regularly examine county deed records (to-wit, you?) the Supreme Court of Texas in Carl M. Archer Trust No. Three v. Tregellas held that the discovery rule delayed the...more
The 2012 Macondo Well blowout and Deepwater Horizon rig explosion gave rise to a slew of lawsuits. Our subject today is one of them. ...more
10/9/2018
/ Appeals ,
BP ,
Clean Water Act ,
Energy Sector ,
Excess Policies ,
Indemnification ,
Insurance Claims ,
Insurance Industry ,
Insurance Litigation ,
Joint Liability ,
Liability Insurance ,
Multidistrict Litigation ,
Oil & Gas ,
Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (OPA 90) ,
Policy Terms ,
TX Supreme Court ,
Underwriting
Coke or Pepsi? Elvis or the Beatles? Left Twix or Right Twix? Fixed or floating royalty? Among the great debates of recent decades, few have proven quite as frustrating as the great “Fixed v. Floating” royalty debate in Texas...more
As promised, here is a more in-depth analysis of the recent Supreme Court of Texas opinion in TRO-X LP v. Anadarko Petroleum Corp.
...more
We’re not saying you should do it, but there is a recipe for ridding oil and gas leases of pesky burdens: Enter into a new lease covering the same interest as the earlier lease and omit any reference to an intent that the...more
In Murphy Exploration & Production Co. — USA v. Adams the Texas Supreme Court held that an offset well clause in an oil and gas lease did not require the lessee to drill wells calculated to protect against drainage. Four...more
Two Texas Supreme Court decisions published on the same day confirm that retained acreage clauses that vary in language from one instrument to another will likely vary in effect. Depending on the language, the lessee might...more
Recall the Battle of the Bastards: The heroic Lady Sansa and the duplicitous Lord Baelish gallop over the hill to save the foolish Jon Snow from the heinous Ramsey Bolton. In similar fashion, but without the malnourished...more
4/9/2018
/ Ambiguous ,
Breach of Contract ,
ConocoPhillips ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Contract Terms ,
Energy Sector ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Oil & Gas ,
Rule Against Perpetuities ,
TX Supreme Court
The ruling from the Supreme Court of Texas in JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., et al v. Orca Assets, G.P., L.L.C. was foreseeable. Experienced energy professionals who pass on the opportunity to examine title for themselves are...more
The Texas Supreme Court recently heard oral argument in three intriguing oil and gas cases. Here’s what you need to know about two of them (We’ll address the third case soon)....more
12/19/2017
/ Appeals ,
ConocoPhillips ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Contract Terms ,
Energy Sector ,
Land Titles ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Oil & Gas ,
Rule Against Perpetuities ,
TX Supreme Court
How many times must an operator suffer for a mistake in a unit declaration? Samson Exploration LLC v. T. S. Reed Properties Inc. makes it twice. (See Hooks v. Samson Lone Star for the first round). The Texas Supreme Court...more
Noble Energy Inc. v. ConocoPhillips Company, a 6-to-3 Texas Supreme Court decision, is a reminder of two things:
How parties to a property transaction describe what’s being acquired and what’s being left behind can have...more
8/23/2017
/ Asset Purchaser ,
Commercial Bankruptcy ,
Contract Terms ,
Energy Sector ,
Environmental Claims ,
Executory Contracts ,
Indemnification Clauses ,
Oil & Gas ,
Purchase Agreement ,
Sale of Assets ,
TX Supreme Court
When must a neighbor sue for nuisance and trespass or else be barred by limitations? It’s a tricky question. In Town of Dish et al v. Atmos Energy et al, the Texas Supreme Court concluded that the claims were time-barred. The...more
We know that in Texas the mineral owner has the right to explore for and produce the minerals. What does that leave for the surface owner? In Lightning Oil Company v. Anadarko E&P Onshore, LLC the Texas Supreme Court tells us...more
In BP America v. Laddex, Ltd. the Texas Supreme Court affirmed that in a lease termination case the trial court cannot limit the jury’s consideration of production in paying quantities to an arbitrary time period. The court...more
We now know what it takes to establish common carrier pipeline status in Texas. According to the Texas Supreme Court in Denbury Green Pipeline Texas LLC v. Texas Rice Land Partners Ltd., all that is required is a reasonable...more
North Shore Energy v. Harkins interpreted an Option Agreement between landowners and a producer over a 400 acre tract. In football they would say the Texas Supreme Court pancaked the plaintiff. In the law, some would call it...more
11/17/2016
/ Ambiguous ,
Appeals ,
Breach of Contract ,
Contract Interpretation ,
Contract Terms ,
Energy Sector ,
Mineral Leases ,
Oil & Gas ,
Property Owners ,
Tortious Interference ,
TX Supreme Court