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 may […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Greenwood v. Lee held that an “easement and right-of-way” was limited to a means of ingress and egress only. Clanton owned a 10-acre tract of land in Brazos County, […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Harrington v. Magellan Pipeline Co., L.P., 10-09-00131-CV, 2011 WL 6225276 (Tex. App.—Waco Dec. 14, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op.), held that a pipeline easement and subsequent assignment were ambiguous […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of some significance to you. Peacock v. Schroeder, 846 S.W.2d 905 (Tex. App.–San Antonio 1973, no writ), concerns easement rights across a large ranch to a small oil and gas lease located within the […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Moore v. Energy States, Inc., 71 S.W.3d 796 (Tex. App.– Eastland 2002, pet. denied), applies the strip-and-gore doctrine, estoppel by deed and the appurtenances doctrine in a deed construction case. […]
Richard F. Brown The following is not a legal opinion. You should consult your attorney if the case may be of significance to you. Glover v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 187 S.W.3d 201 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 2005, pet. denied), applied the doctrine of strips and gores and adverse possession to determine title to the minerals […]
