Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
Richard F. Brown   ExxonMobil Corporation v. Valence Operating Company, 174 S.W.3d 303 (Tex. App.— Houston [1st Dist.] 2005, pet. filed), holds the operator liable for substantial damages for breach of the uniform maintenance of interest (“MOI”) provision of the parties’ joint operating agreement (“JOA”). The MOI provision was the typical  form  JOA  provision  found […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
Richard F. Brown   EOG Res., Inc. v. Wagner & Brown, Ltd., 202 S.W. 3d 338 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2006, pet. filed), construes the meaning of a farmout agreement depth limitation expressed as “the deepest producing interval as obtained in the test well”. Farmor retained the deep rights under a provision in the farmout agreement […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
Richard F. Brown   Seagull Energy E & P, Inc. v. Eland Energy, Inc., 207 S.W.3d 342 (Tex. 2006), determines whether the sale of a non-operating working interest that is subject to an operating agreement releases the seller from its obligations to the operator under the operating agreement. Seagull as operator sued Eland as non-operator […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
CASE NOTE Richard F. Brown   Broesche v. Jacobson, 218 S.W. 3d 267 (Tex. App. Houston [14th Dist.] 2007, no pet., holds that “working interest” and “leasehold interest” do not necessarily have the same meaning. In this case, the text described the interest to be transferred as “[o]ne-half of all oil and gas interests of […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
CASE NOTE Richard F. Brown   The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you.   Moon Royalty, LLC v. Boldrick Partners, 244 S.W.3d 391 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2007, no pet.), held that a conveyance of the wells and lands described on Exhibit ―A‖ […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
CASE NOTE Richard F. Brown   The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you.   First Permian, L.L.C. v Graham, 212 S.W.3d 368 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2006, pet. denied) holds that a preferential right reserved by the holder of a production payment terminated […]

Tuesday, September 1st, 2015
Richard F. Brown   The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you.   SouthTex 66 Pipeline Co., LTD. v. Spoor, 238 S.W.3d 538 (Tex. App.-Hous. [14th Dist.] 2007, pet. filed), holds that a pipeline easement acquired by WesTTex Pipeline Company by condemnation […]