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.
Randy
In Alcott v. 1893 Oil and Gas, Ltd., a Texas court of appeals applied the scourge of inaccurate, incomplete or careless (sometimes all three!) deed drafting – the statute of frauds – to reject a claim to ownership of minerals.
The facts
In 1917, the owner of 2,092-acres in Live Oak
Frontier Drilling, LLC v. XTO Energy, Inc. has the indicia of an inequitable result, but as I remind my wife every time she objects to what she deems to be an outrageous jury verdict, we don’t know all the facts and the court’s gotta follow the law, so let’s not judge.
The facts
Drilling
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 Rusty TuckerDayston v, LLC v. Brooke, voided a real estate contract because it failed to satisfy the Texas statute of frauds. Let’s see how the drafting mishap occured.
The description
A Farm and Ranch Contract between Dayston as seller and Brooke as buyer described the land to be conveyed this way: (
Co-author Trenton PattersonCopano 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 (here is our report), holding in favor of landowner the Bujnochs. The Texas Supreme Court reversed.
How to almost
Proving once again that gratitude is the rarest of human emotions, a contract between a landman and his client was deemed unenforceable, leaving the landman with nothing, even though he actually secured oil and gas leases for the client (at least he said that he did). In Moore v. Bearkat Energy Partners, LLC, independent landman Moore signed a contract with the purported agent of Lane. Lane would pay Moore “$600 per mineral acre for each and every lease [Lane] enter[ed] with [Moore’s] assistance.” Moore said he helped Lane secure numerous leases, but Lane refused to pay.
Continue Reading Landman Defeated by the Statute of Frauds
According to Mr. Bumble, the law is an ass. I disagree (Know a lawyer who’s an ass? That’s another conversation). In Davis v. Mueller the law was not an ass, per se, but as applied by the Texas Supreme Court it showed little mercy.
A refresher on conveyances
Continue Reading Texas Mineral Deeds Survive the Statute of Frauds
Why don’t we learn from other people’s mistakes? I have no idea, but Sewing v. Bowman is a good example of what happens when we don’t. The question was whether or not two friends of almost 50 years formed a partnership. This case is not about buying leases and drilling wells, but it very well
Maybe you’ve been there. All signals are “go” for closing on your PSA. Then the buyer chooses not to complete the transaction. What to do? A question your lawyer will think about when asked to enforce a purchase and sale agreement: Does it describe the property well enough to comply with the statute of frauds?
Co-author Chance Decker