Lyle v. Jane Guinn Revocable Trust

The trial court did not err in holding, as a matter of law, that appellant is bound by the 1919 Assignment and is obligated to account for and pay the heirs for their shares of the one-fourth royalty interest in his portion of the lease. Houston's 1st Court of Appeals, No. 01-09-00081-CV, 03-11-2010

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

OPINION

This case involves the interpretation of an assignment of rights to an oil and gas lease commonly known as the Hogg-Japhet Lease. Appellants Kenneth R. Lyle and Warbonnet Exploration Company (“Warbonnet”) appeal the trial court’s interlocutory order granting partial summary judgment in favor of appellees, the heirs of Dan A. Japhet, a party to the original assignment (collectively, “the Japhet heirs”). In seven issues, Lyle*fn1 argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for summary judgment and granting the Japhet heirs’ motion for partial summary judgment and in holding that Lyle is bound by the original assignment, that Lyle is obligated to account to the Japhet heirs for his proportional share of their interest in the lease, and that Lyle is obligated to pay the Japhet heirs a one-fourth net profit royalty as referenced in the assignment. Specifically, Lyle argues that (1) the “additional consideration provision,” which the Japhet heirs argue is an explanation of the one-fourth royalty interest, is actually a production payment that was fully paid and discharged prior to Lyle’s acquisition of the lease; (2) no interest was reserved to Dan A. Japhet in the assignment; (3) the Japhet heirs “are strangers to [him], have no title, and [he] has superior title to his leasehold interest”; (4) the Japhet heirs have no recorded interest in the lease; (5) the Japhet heirs’ claims are barred by four-year and two-year statutes of limitations, laches, extinguishment of interest, and payment of all consideration; and (6) alternatively, he presented evidence that raised genuine issues of material fact as to the proper construction of the assignment, payment, and discharge and satisfaction, and on his defenses of extinguishment of the production payment, laches, statute of limitations, and waiver.

We affirm.

Lyle v. Jane Guinn Revocable Trust

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to New York Law Journal