Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Exxon Corp. v. Breezevale Limited1 holds that an oral participation agreement for a 2 1/2% working interest is unenforceable under the statute of frauds. Breezevale assisted Exxon for eighteen months […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Moore v. Energy States, Inc., 71 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. App.– Eastland 2002, pet. denied), applies the strip-and-gore doctrine, estoppel by deed and the appurtenances doctrine in a deed construction case. […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Steger v. Muenster Drilling Co., Inc., 134 S.W.3d 359 (Tex. App.–Fort Worth 2003, pet. denied) holds that a life tenant could grant oil and gas leases that extended beyond the […]
Richard F. Brown Geodyne Energy Income Production Partnership I-E v. The Newton Corp., 97 S.W.3d 779 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2003, no pet.), considers the liability of a nonoperator and the nonoperator’s assignee for a proportionate part of plugging and abandoning a well at a cost of $742,409.67. The well ceased production in paying quantities on December […]
CASE NOTE Richard F. Brown Garcia v. Garcia, S.W.3d , 2006 WL 1684742 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2006, pet. denied), holds that a deed conveys the interest as broadly described in the deed, and the interest conveyed in the deed is not limited by the more specific description included in the deed. The grantor under the […]
CASE NOTE Richard F. Brown Stewman Ranch, Inc. v. Double M. Ranch, Ltd., 192 S.W.3d 808 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2006, pet. denied), construed a deed reservation to determine whether it reserved one-half of the royalty in “the described lands,” or only one-half of the royalty grantors then owned. Grantors did not own 100% of the royalty […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Hlavinka v. Hlavinka, 2008 WL 2151527 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi, May 22, 2008, no pet.), holds that the expiration of a twenty-five year term mineral interest should be calculated from the […]
