Lario Oil and Gas Company v. EOG Resources, Inc., 2013 ND 98

In 2004, riparian landowners leased land to Context Energy, which assigned these leases to EOG; White Lake was treated as navigable, suggesting mineral rights under the lake belonged to the State.
In 2005 the ND Attorney General memo suggested White Lake may not have been navigable at statehood, impacting ownership of under-lake minerals.
In 2008 Lang & Co. leased the same lands beneath White Lake to Lang, which assigned these leases to Lario; Lang’s leases described only the land beneath the lake bed.
In 2009 the State disclaimed ownership of land beneath White Lake, including minerals; EOG tendered bonus for the wet acres which lessors refused.
In 2010 Lario filed suit seeking a judgment validating its Lang leases and quieting title to the oil and gas under White Lake; EOG cross-moved for summary judgment.
The district court granted Lario summary judgment, holding that the Lang leases failed to describe wet acres and quieting title in Lario; the appellate court reversed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do the 2004 leases include the wet acres under White Lake?	Lario contends the wet acres were not conveyed due to the specific land description and lack of explicit wet-acre language.	EOG contends the leases conveyed the entire mineral interest including wet acres, despite dry-acre notation.	Yes; EOG possessed the wet acres.
Should Mother Hubbard clauses affect the outcome?	Lario argues the clauses broaden the description to cover adjoining land not specifically described.	EOG argues clauses are not controlling given the express wet-acre conveyance.	Not reached.

Hild v. Johnson, 2006 ND 217 (ND 2006) (specific description controls over acreage; not navigability for title)
Brigham Oil and Gas, L.P. v. Lario Oil & Gas Co., 2011 ND 154 (ND 2011) (summary judgment standards; contract interpretation guides)
Irish Oil and Gas, Inc. v. Riemer, 2011 ND 22 (ND 2011) (contractual interpretation of oil and gas leases)