Following the Texas Supreme Court’s ruling in Van Dyke v. Navigator Group that courts interpreting “antiquated instruments” that use 1/8 within a double fraction must begin with the rebuttable presumption that 1/8 refers to the entire mineral estate, Texas courts have wrestled with its implications.
In this recent case (Patch Energy LLC v. Indio Minerals LLC, No. 11-22-00280-CV, 2024 WL 4845955 [Tex. App.—Eastland Nov. 21, 2024, no pet. h.]), competing mineral purchasers claimed superior title to a royalty interest in Midland County, Texas that had been reserved in a 1930 mineral conveyance.
The Texas Supreme Court heard oral arguments last week in a case that could substantially clarify, or even fundamentally reshape, the characterization and ownership of underground storage rights in Texas.
The Texas Business Courts will potentially impact a wide range of cases, from high-value contract disputes to intricate corporate governance issues.
El Paso Court of Appeals tells lessee that he cannot establish constructive production sufficient to hold a lease without bearing the risk and liabilities of exploration and production.
The legacy doctrine recognizes that during the “era” in which the deed in question was executed, “‘1/8’ was widely used as a term of art to refer to the total mineral estate.”
