MISSOURI GAS ENERGY v. GRANT COUNTY ASSESSOR
2021 OK CIV APP 30
| Okla. Civ. App. | 2021Background:
- Petitioner Missouri Gas Energy (MGE) stored natural gas in Southern Star pipeline storage located in Grant County and sought a Freeport (interstate commerce) exemption from ad valorem taxation for gas it owned but that was shipped and stored in the pipeline.
- Grant County Assessor and Board denied the exemption; MGE filed for de novo review in district court.
- Earlier summary judgment for County was reversed on appeal (MGE II) after the Legislature amended statutory language to treat oil/gas as "goods" for the Freeport Exemption; the case was remanded to determine the amount exempt.
- On remand MGE moved for summary judgment seeking exemption for 87.53% of the gas; it submitted affidavits and records showing that portion originated outside Oklahoma, was stored in Oklahoma nine months or less, and was sold out of state.
- County argued MGE’s application was untimely and that commingling prevented proof of what volume originated outside Oklahoma or was stored under nine months; County offered no competing evidence.
- The trial court granted summary judgment to MGE; the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed, holding undisputed evidence entitled MGE to exemption for the claimed percentage.
Issues:
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Timeliness/validity of MGE's amended Freeport application | MGE: application valid; prior appeals show it was not void | County: untimely Form 901-F is void under 68 O.S. §2902.2 | Held for MGE; res judicata from earlier appellate decision bars relitigation of timeliness |
| Whether commingling defeats proof of what gas originated outside Oklahoma | MGE: quantity (not particular molecules) can be shown by allocation records/formulas; 87.53% originated out-of-state | County: commingling with in-state gas prevents proving which volume originated outside Oklahoma | Held for MGE; under MGE I the relevant inquiry is quantity shipped in/out, not traceability of molecules |
| Whether commingling defeats proof of storage duration (<9 months) | MGE: storage-turnover records show storage in County turns every nine months, qualifying for exemption | County: commingling prevents proving which portion was stored <9 months | Held for MGE; undisputed evidence established storage duration for the claimed percentage |
| Entitlement to summary judgment for 87.53% exemption | MGE: presented uncontroverted affidavits/documents establishing the three Freeport elements for 87.53% | County: disputed proof on origin and duration, so summary judgment improper | Held for MGE; no material fact dispute—MGE entitled to judgment as a matter of law for the claimed percentage |
Key Cases Cited
- In the Matter of the Assessment of Personal Property Taxes Against Missouri Gas Energy, 234 P.3d 938 (Okla. 2008) (MGE I) (ownership/allocation principles for commingled pipeline gas; exemption depends on quantity shipped in/out)
- Missouri Gas Energy v. Grant County Assessor, 376 P.3d 923 (Okla. Civ. App. 2016) (MGE II) (remanded for determination of exempt amount after statutory change treating oil/gas as goods)
- Read v. Read, 57 P.3d 561 (Okla. 2001) (res judicata bars relitigation of issues already decided)
- Brown v. Alliance Real Estate Group, 976 P.2d 1043 (Okla. 1999) (summary judgment appropriate when no substantial controversy of material fact)
- Vance v. Federal National Mortgage Association, 988 P.2d 1275 (Okla. 1999) (appellate review of summary judgment is de novo)