Lesley v. VETERANS LAND BD. OF STATE
352 S.W.3d 479
| Tex. | 2011Background
- Bluegreen Southwest One, L.P. acquired 4,100 acres southwest of Fort Worth and held the executive right to lease minerals; Hedrick and Lesley retained the remaining mineral interests; Mountain Lakes subdivision imposed restrictive covenants restricting oil and gas development; Bluegreen deeds to lot owners conveyed surface and most mineral interests but not the executive right; the Lesley deeds reserved a one-fourth mineral interest and included a notice provision for Crown filing; petitioners sued for declaratory and injunctive relief arguing the executive right was violated and covenants unenforceable.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the VLB enjoy sovereign immunity from damages in this land-use dispute? | Petitioners claim the suit seeks land interests and should proceed despite immunity. | VLB is immune from suits for damages absent legislative consent. | Yes, VLB immune from damages. |
| Was the executive right conveyed to Bluegreen's lot-owner deeds by Day & Co. precedent? | Lesley contends the reserve misdescribed the interest; reform may be needed. | Bluegreen deeds conveyed the executive right unless expressly reserved. | Executive right impliedly conveyed to lot owners unless reserved. |
| Should the Lesley deeds be reformed for mutual mistake in mineral reservation? | Lesley argues mistake in reservation of one-fourth of all minerals. | Mistake not plainly evident; limitations issue for factual trial. | Reformation issues require factual determination; not barred by limitations. |
| Did Bluegreen breach the executive-right duty by imposing restrictive covenants without notice? | Restrictive covenants harmed non-executive interests; breach of duty. | Covenants limited by vote provisions; not an express withdrawal of the right. | Bluegreen breached, cancellation of covenants appropriate. |
| What is the governing remedy for breach of the executive duty in this context? | Breach entitles non-executives to relief beyond damages. | Remedy should balance surface interests; not overbearing. | Remedy: cancellation of restrictive covenants. |
Key Cases Cited
- Day & Co., Inc. v. Texland Petroleum, Inc., 786 S.W.2d 667 (Tex. 1990) (presumption that executive right follows the mineral interest; both conveyance and reservation accompany the executive right)
- Manges v. Guerra, 673 S.W.2d 180 (Tex. 1984) (fiduciary duty of the executive; must acquire for non-executives every benefit obtained for self)
- Andretta v. West, 415 S.W.2d 638 (Tex. 1967) (fiduciary relationship; duty to acquire benefits for non-executives when executing leases)
- Bass v. San Antonio, 113 S.W.3d 735 (Tex. 2003) (non-exercise of executive rights may still breach if coercive or self-serving; discovery issues)
- Schlittler v. Smith, 101 S.W.2d 543 (Tex. 1937) (utmost fair dealing in executive duties; early fiduciary framing)