- “as a royalty interest an undivided one-half of the usual and customary one-eighth (1/8) royalty
Consulting Agreements, Overrides, and the Statute of Frauds – What a Mess
Co-author: David Pruitt
Can a consulting agreement convey overriding royalty interests without naming the leases? The Bankruptcy court for the Southern District of Texas tackled that question in In re Barrow Shaver Resources Company, LLC. In summary, the answer is “maybe” … “sometimes” … “it depends on the proof”.
The facts
Independent operator Barrow
When “Right of Way” Doesn’t Mean Easement
Co-author: Gunner West
The words of an instrument conveying real property in Texas mean something, of course. But so does the placement of those words … which leads to the result in SRO Land & Minerals, LP v. BNSF Railway Co. A 1901 deed to The Pecos River Rail Road Company conveyed fee simple title
Texas Court Deems Double-Fraction Royalty to be “Fixed”
“Better the end of a thing than the beginning thereof … .” Ecclesiastes 7:8. The writer was probably prophesying about Texas’ never-ending double-fraction mineral disputes.
Next up: Ovintive USA, Inc. et al v. High Noon Resources, LLC et al in which the Eastland Court of Appeals found that a 1958 mineral deed reserved a fixed
Presumed-Grant Can’t Sink a Floating Royalty
Co-Author Gunner West
In B.H.C.H. Mineral, Ltd. v. Needmore Minerals, LLP, the San Antonio Court of appeals held that a reservation of “1/32 of all oil, gas and other minerals” coupled with attribute-stripping language and a minimum royalty requirement created a non-executive mineral interest with a floating royalty. The court also declined to apply
Two Words, a Letter Nobody Could Find, and $2.3 million in Royalties
Co-author David Pruitt
Our Cornucopia post was a reminder that “subject to” is a phrase that punches well above its weight. In Brown et al v. Endeavor Energy Resources, L.P., those same two words undid a $2.3 million summary judgment and returned the case to the trial court for a do-over.
The facts
Randy
Texas Courts Now Have Jurisdiction Over Out-of-State Minerals
Co-author David Priutt
So says the Supreme Court of Texas in Braxton Minerals III, LLC v. Bauer. For many years there was doubt and confusion over whether a Texas court could assert its jurisdiction in a suit over mineral rights located in another state. In Braxton the Court answered with an emphatic yes, reversing
Texas Has No Common-Law Remedy for Washed-Out Override …
Co-author Gunner West
… at least according to the El Paso Court of Appeals. In Craddick v. Cimarex Energy Co., that court affirmed a take-nothing judgment against owners of overriding royalty interests in an oil and gas lease that were washed out when the lessee surrendered the lease to the mineral owner. The court
Easement by Estoppel or Not? Texas Supreme Court Wrestles With the Question
Co-author Caleb White
In Boerschig v. Rio Grande Electrical Cooperative, Inc. the Supreme Court of Texas, in a four-justice opinion, a concurrence and four dissents, determined that an electric cooperative holds an easement by estoppel for a distribution line but, disregarding a jury finding, also found as a matter of law that a significant
Texas Court Doubles Down on the Van Dyke Presumption
Co-author Kealey Poole*
We at Energy and the Law solemnly swear and affirm that we will no longer report on the Van Dyke Presumption just as soon as litigants – win, lose or remand – exhaust their efforts to confirm, refute, distinguish or overcome it. Until then …
By a 1956 deed the Hoffmans conveyed