In a word, the surface estate owner. If that’s all the learning you are up for today, proceed directly to the musical interludes. If you want to know why the Supreme Court of Texas had to say this again, read on....more
Sewak v. Sutherland Energy Co. Ltd. is of interest for how the court defined terms commonly used in consulting contracts in the oil and gas industry, and how difficult it is to foresee all contingencies when negotiating a...more
An understanding of Willis v. Barry Graham Oil Service LLC requires knowledge of two principles underlying the Louisiana Anti-Oilfield Indemnity Act:
The LOAIA bars an oilfield agreement to the extent that the agreement...more
Texas Crude v. Burlington Resources Oil and Gas considers the relationship between the operator and non-operators under Articles V and VI of the 1982 Model Form Joint Operating Agreement....more
In Steelhead Midstream Partners, LLC v. CL III Funding Holding Company, LLC, the Texas Supreme Court authorized a pipeline owner’s breach-of-contract claim—alleging a co-owner used foreclosure to avoid cost-sharing...more
3/14/2025
/ Appellate Courts ,
Breach of Contract ,
Contract Terms ,
Dispute Resolution ,
Enforcement Actions ,
Foreclosure ,
Jurisdiction ,
Oil & Gas ,
Pipelines ,
State and Local Government ,
TX Supreme Court
After four stops at the lower courts, Kenneth Hahn v. ConocoPhillips has been resolved by the Supreme Court of Texas. The Court opined on the effect of two instruments often used to clarify land titles in Texas: ...more
2/26/2025
/ Contract Terms ,
Land Titles ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Mining ,
Oil & Gas ,
Property Owners ,
Real Estate Transactions ,
Royalties ,
Texas ,
TX Supreme Court
Kouatli v. Endeavor Energy Resources L.P. offers valuable (and obvious) lessons on how NOT to perform a Master Service Agreement in the oil patch (or, per Billly Bob and friends, “The Patch”), to wit...more
The message in RSM Production Corporation v. Gaz du Cameroun SA: According to the federal Fifth Circuit, an arbitration tribunal’s construction of a contract and the arbitration rules governing the dispute “hold, however...more
In In the Matter of Offshore Oil Services, Inc., Offshore owned and operated the M/V Anna. Offshore sued Island Operating Company for exoneration and/or limitation of liability for a personal injury claim by an employee of...more
MDC Enegy LLC v. Crosby Energy Services Inc. et al. was an indemnity dispute in which the players were many and the facts complicated.
But first...more
The question in Rock River Minerals, LP and Carr v. v. Pioneer Natural Resources, et al.: Did an assignment of overriding royalty interests in Texas oil and gas leases include a depth limitation? No....more
Fasken Ranch Ltd et al v. Puig et al featured a reservation in the sale of a ranch of an undivided 1/16 non-participating royalty interest “free of cost forever.” What does that mean? In particular, does it mean that the...more
Maverick Natural Resources, LLC at al v. Glenn D. Cooper Oil & Gas, Inc. is for control freaks wherever you are … and for those of you who advise the aforesaid control freaks....more
In Occidental Permian, Ltd. et al v. Citation 2002 Investment LLC the Supreme Court construed a 1987 assignment from Shell Western E& P Inc. to Citation of a large number of properties. The instrument contained these...more
In Carl v. Hillcorp Energy the Supreme Court of Texas addressed the relationship between the lessee’s use of gas off-premises under a free-use clause and the lessor’s burden to share post-production costs (PPCs) under the...more
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...more
According to Darkhorse Water LP v. Birch Operations Inc. et al., the form of an instrument affecting real property in Texas does not affect the interest conveyed by the instrument. It’s what the document says about the...more
In Texas, no. Read on to learn why. In Nortex Minerals LP v. Blackbeard Operating LLC et al, the question was the meaning of this limited assignment provision in the “Alliance Leases”, oil and gas leases covering 27,000 acres...more
Contacted at his seaside villa, Captain Renault said he was shocked that Elsie and Adrian Opiela are asking the Texas Supreme Court to review questions surrounding the Railroad Commission’s approval of a drilling permit for a...more
Parkman v. W&T Offshore, Inc., et al features two contractors playing hot potato over liability for a company man’s alleged negligence. The takeaway: Write your Master Service Agreement to address your liability concerns, and...more
The outcome of a multimillion-dollar suit was in the hands of a jury of 12 good and honorable citizens. The question: Was a certain party an agent, consultant, contractor, or none of the above? One side wanted the jury to be...more
The Duhig Rule is back, this time in Echols Minerals LLC, et al v. Green et al.
Framing the discussion, Duhig v. Peavy Moore Lumber Company and Trial v. Dragon -
In Duhig the grantor in a general warranty deed...more
Foreshadowing a grim future for family weddings and funerals, Bell and Petsch v. Petch is a property dispute over five tracts of land in Gillespie County, Texas, in which siblings are the combatants. The events are less...more
The question in Self v, BPX Operating Company is how to balance the Louisiana Civil Code Art 2292 principle of negotiorum gestio against Louisiana’s conservation statutes....more
Barkley v. Connally, a “bet-the-farm” case if there ever was one, invokes the merger clause, a basic principle of contract law. Clients and lawyers: Read this analysis so as to avoid boundless grief and disappointment for...more