It seems to be fairly well settled that you can’t use trespass-to-try-title to recover a nonpossessory royalty interest in Texas. What if you call the interest a “mineral interest stripped of every attribute except the right...more
State of Texas. V. Reimer et al. studied lawyer-nerdy questions of standing to bring a lawsuit and statutes of limitations as applied to inverse condemnation suits. Spoiler alert: To the chagrin of the landowners, waiting...more
7/22/2025
/ Adverse Possession ,
Eminent Domain ,
Inverse Condemnation ,
Judicial Authority ,
Land Titles ,
Mineral Leases ,
Oil & Gas ,
Property Owners ,
Standing ,
Statute of Limitations ,
Takings Clause ,
Texas
Dow Construction, LLC v. BPX Operating Company resolved a bundle of issues arising out of a drilling unit established by the Louisiana Commissioner of Conservation: who has the right to a drilling cost report, the operator’s...more
In Cactus Water v. COG Operating, the Supreme Court affirmed that mineral lessee COG, not water rights owner Cactus (who derived it rights from the surface owner), has the right to possession, custody, control, and...more
In Franklin v. Regions Bank the Fifth Circuit concluded that a royalty clause in a mineral lease resulted in a gross proceeds royalty; the royalty owners did not bear their proportionate share of post-production costs. Read...more
Your Legislature has adjourned after enacting significant bills affecting the energy industry. To sum it up, the industry has friends in high places whenever the Lege is in session (Alternative energy was in jeopardy for a...more
6/24/2025
/ Energy Policy ,
Energy Projects ,
Infrastructure ,
New Legislation ,
Nuclear Power ,
Oil & Gas ,
Orphan Wells ,
Regulatory Reform ,
Renewable Energy ,
State Legislatures ,
State Taxes ,
Texas ,
Water ,
Wind Power
The takeaway from DDR Weinert, Limited et al v. Ovintiv USA Inc. is that equitable recoupment rescued a royalty payor from its mistaken payment of royalties. But first,
The events.
The Richters were mineral lessors...more
In American Midstream (Alabama Intrastate), LLC v. Rainbow Energy Marketing Corporation, the Texas Supreme Court held that the trial court improperly inserted the words “scheduled” and “physical” into a contract. By...more
In Cromwell v. Anadarko E & P Onshore LLC the Supreme Court of Texas did what it so often does: In order to provide “legal certainty and predictability”, the Court considered the plain language of a contract in order to...more
In Williams O & G Resources, LLC v. Diamondback Energy, Inc., a federal magistrate judge concluded that the Texas Relinquishment Act does not apply to public-school lands patented after 1931. The report and recommendation was...more
In Myers-Woodward, LLC v. Underground Services Markham, LLC et al, (discussed previously) the parties disagreed on how to calculate Myers’ royalty on salt produced by Underground....more
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
As in every year, in 2024 the grinches of law enforcement brought financial and corporal misery to bad guys in energy. Here is a review of the crimes of only a few of the convicted, admitted and alleged bribsters, swindlers...more
5/14/2025
/ Bribery ,
Corporate Misconduct ,
Corruption ,
Criminal Prosecution ,
Energy Sector ,
Foreign Agents ,
Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) ,
Investors ,
Money Laundering ,
Oil & Gas ,
Penalties ,
Securities Fraud ,
White Collar Crimes
Thought you’d heard the last of force majuere cases arising from Winter Storm Uri? Think again.
In Marathon Oil Company v. Koch Services LLC. the question was how to measure damages suffered by Koch for Marathon’s...more
In In re Pearl Resources LLC, a Houston bankruptcy court rejected the Texas General Land Office’s attempt to partially terminate state oil and gas leases in Pecos County, despite finding the operator had breached offset well...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
The category is “terms that confuse us” for one hundred dollars. Without resorting to your favorite legal dictionary or lawyer, explain the difference between a reservation and an exception in a Texas warranty deed. Stumped?...more
In Bush v. Yarborough Oil & Gas, LP a decades-old tax foreclosure judgment did not affect a previously severed mineral interest not owned by the delinquent taxpayer. The mineral owners were neither named nor served in the...more
We begin with a word from your sponsor. After enduring several generative AI tutorials, we urge you to keep on reading Energy and the Law. Why? Our blog is more accurate, at least a little “fun”, offers insightful musical...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
The growling and barking presented by a claim for tortious interference is often far worse than the bite. Consider Segundo Navarro Drilling, Ltd. v. Chilton , which is a good example of that phenomenon in an oil and gas...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
DALF Energy, LLC v. GS Oilfield Services addresses a fiduciary’s deceptive actions in oil and gas transactions. The Fifth Circuit held:
self-dealing may constitute a breach of fiduciary duty even when the principal is...more
Patch LLC et al v. Indio Minerals LLC et al was a dispute over title to a 1/8th NPRI in land in Midland County. Viola Ash, an Illinois resident, executed a warranty deed in 1932 for land in Midland County, reserving a 1/8...more