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
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
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
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....more
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
Delay in filing suit too often spells doom for the plaintiff, as we learn in Zadeck Succession et al v. Treme et al. Treme (as in the family collectively) claimed their father, Vandiver, was conveyed a 5% working...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
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
Federal Insurance Company et al v. Select Energy Services LLC and Exco et al. is a reminder for negotiators of indemnity and defense obligations in oilfield contracts that choice of law is important. Ignore it when drafting...more