The plain, ordinary, and generally accepted meaning of a word doesn’t mean “anything goes”. It depends on context, says the Supreme Court of Texas in Finley Resources Inc. v. Headington Royalty Inc., a dispute over the meaning of “predecessors”. For the underlying facts see our post on the court of appeals decision.
The release
Can a non-operating working interest in a Texas oil and gas lease be adversely possessed? The Amarillo Court of Appeals said yes in PBEX II, LLC v. Dorchester Minerals, L.P.
In 1989, Torch Oil & Gas succeeded to a working
Texas courts continue to address the “fixed or floating” non-participating royalty interest question. The El Paso Court of Appeals’ answer in Bridges v. Uhl et al. was floating, based on the language in that particular reservation,
In 1940 the Klattenhoffs sold a 640-acre tract in Upton County to Virgil Powell, reserving, “an
Ellison v. Three Rivers Acquisition LLC et al., on remand from the Texas Supreme Court, is the third round of a boundary dispute between mineral lessees in Irion County.
For the history of Ms. Ellison’s odyssey from court to court to court, see our 2019 post discussing the first Court
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 “greatest estate …” differs in concept from the “greatest estate possible”.
A deed will pass whatever
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 Sandel, reserving an overriding royalty interest in 23 of the leases; and can’t show that the liens were
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 result from the Supreme Court: Execution of the 2013 Amended Correction Mineral Deed by the parties to the original 2005 Mineral Deed and the 2006 Correction Mineral Deed, without joinder of the current owners of the minerals, complied with Texas Property Code §5.029. The question remaining was whether the current owners were bona fide purchases for value without notice. Skipping all sorts of rulings on side issues, the result is that current owner Yates was not a BFP. Other appellants survived to fight another day.
Continue Reading Texas Correction Deed Statute Revisited … Again
Co-author Max BrownIn the Estate of Terry Banta presents yet another purported Texas land transaction doomed because of disregard for the Statute of Frauds. Terry Banta and the Herriotts entered into an oral agreement for the Herriotts to purchase a piece of property from Banta. In an unfortunate turn of events for everyone, Banta
Co-author Brittany BlakeyIn re: Estate of Robert Scott Masters, Deceased reveals the price to be paid for failing to timely admit a will to probate or as a muniment of title.
Know this about Texas probate law
The Estates Code requires that a will be submitted for probate (or as a muniment of title)
Co-author Trevor LawhornSM Energy Co. v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. considers a question frequently asked in Texas suits affecting title: When is a suit a trespass to try title action and not a declaratory judgment action?
The dispute
SM Energy and Union Pacific are parties to three oil and gas leases covering lands in