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
It’s not exactly Deuteronomy 23:19, but the Supreme Court of Texas has an opinion about interest. They don’t like it if it’s compounded. Samson Exploration LLC v. Bordages addressed interest to be charged on unpaid royalties...more
Montgomery Trustee v. ES3 Minerals and Echo Minerals is another Texas fixed or floating royalty case. Before diving into the details, perhaps it’s best to describe the pattern the courts seem to fall into to resolve 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
So, you found all the heirs and you have an agreed judgment stipulating title. Time to pay royslties? Maybe. And you have signed division orders. Surely, you can pay now? Maybe. These were the questions facing the parties in...more
Freeeport-McMoRan Oil and Gas, LLC and Ovintiv USA Inc. v. 1776 Energy Partners LLC presented a recurring question faced by Texas oil and gas producers: When can proceeds of production be withheld by the operator without...more
6/2/2023
/ Contract Terms ,
Gas Royalties ,
Gross Proceeds ,
Mineral Extraction ,
Mineral Leases ,
Mineral Rights ,
Natural Resources ,
Oil & Gas ,
Safe Harbors ,
Texas ,
TX Supreme Court
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...more
The question in Kim R. Smith Logging Inc. v. Indigo Minerals LLC was whether a disgruntled Louisiana royalty owner sent its demand for unpaid royalties to the right party. It turns out that it did....more
The principal contention in the tax refund case of Exxon v. United States was whether certain mineral related transactions between Exxon and the countries of Qatar and Malaysia were sales or leases. Originally Exxon treated...more
11/9/2022
/ Corporate Taxes ,
Exxon Mobil ,
Gas Royalties ,
Income Taxes ,
IRS ,
Lease Tax ,
Malaysia ,
Mineral Leases ,
Oil & Gas ,
Profits ,
Qatar ,
Revenue ,
Sales Tax ,
Statements of Economic Interest ,
Tax Liability ,
Tax Refunds
The common thread throughout the myriad oil and gas royalty cases decided recently by Texas courts could be “harmony”, the reading of different, seemingly conflicting, contract provisions so as to give meaning to all....more
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...more
Recall our recent post on Carl v. Hilcorp Energy Company from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas discussing the lessee’s royalty obligations on gas used off the premises in a market-value lease. See...more
The question is presented again but in a different format: In Texas is a lessee allowed to deduct post-production costs (PPC’s) from the lessor’s gas royalty? In Carl v. Hilcorp, the answer was “yes” based on the language in...more
It was jurisprudential Groundhog Day as the Supreme Court of Texas handed down Nettye Engler Energy v. Bluestone Natural Resources, another in a series of postproduction cost disputes, only two days after Puxsutawney Phil...more
In resolving a dispute over post-production cost deductions from oil and gas royalties (PPC’s), the court in Shirlaine West Properties Ltd et al v. Jamestown Resources, LLC and Total E&P USA, Inc. opined that the case ” … is...more
Ridgefield Permian, LLC, et al. v. Diamondback E & P LLC, et al. addresses the scope of a property interest foreclosed upon by a tax suit in Reeves County, Texas. In this post we will shortcut the complicated facts and...more
“Ratification is not a game of ‘gotcha’”, said the Texas Supreme Court in BPX Operating Co. v. Strickhausen. The Court, in a 5-4 opinion, addressed the standard for an oil and gas lessor’s implied ratification of an...more
This is another chapter in the long-running dispute between Eagle Oil & Gas Co. and. TRO-X, L.P. The litigation arises out of an agreement to acquire and sell oil and gas leases. Here, TRO-X alleges that Eagle failed to...more
The Supreme Court of Texas has ruled that oil and gas leases under consideration in BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC v. Walker Murray Randle, et al. did not permit deduction of postproduction costs from sales proceeds...more
In May et al v. Succession of Mayo Romero et al a Louisiana court of appeal denied the plaintiff’s efforts to suspend the running of liberative prescription in the face of peremptory exceptions. The discovery rule is one...more
Devon Energy Prod. Co., et al. v. Sheppard, et al is your kind of case if you are in search of:
- A roadmap for slicing and dicing royalty calculations in myriad ways,
- Pretty good summaries of the Supreme Court’s...more
WTX Fund, LLC v. Brown, is Texas mineral deed construction case.
In the same year that crazy thing happened at Coogan’s Bluff, the Roaches executed a Mineral Conveyance to the Holts. Let’s review the transaction and ask...more
Here we continue our discussion of the Texas Supreme Court’s opinion in Piranha Partners et al. v. Joe B. Neuhoff et al. determining that an assignment of an overriding royalty in minerals unambiguously conveyed the override...more
The question for the Texas Supreme Court in Piranha Partners et al. v. Joe B. Neuhoff et al. was whether an assignment of an overriding royalty in minerals conveyed the override only in production from the identified well...more
Confirming the obvious, in In re Etheridge a Texas court concluded that “personal effects,” in a last will and testament did not include mineral royalties. Let’s investigate how the case got this far....more