Wolfe v. Devon Energy Production Co.
382 S.W.3d 434
Tex. App.2012Background
- Dispute over ownership of an undivided 1/2 mineral interest in ~70 acres Johnson County; cross-motions for summary judgment resulted in trial court rulings for Devon and the Giesers; Llano and Wolfe appeal on multiple issues.
- Chain of title shows Morfeld as trustee for Wolfe in the 1982–1984 period, with Barbara Gieser’s later conveyances reserving or admitting mineral interests; later leases and a 2001 Summit foreclosure affected lien and mineral reservations.
- Barbara Morfeld’s 2005 affidavit and related documents become pivotal to standing and trusts; Devon and Giesers object to the affidavit’s admissibility and to the assertion of a trust or resulting trust.
- Llano’s standing issues hinge on whether it had a present or past mineral interest via Wolfe’s or Morfeld’s actions, including Wolfe’s later after-acquired title and Ivera Morfeld’s conveyance to Wolfe in 2008.
- TAB Deed of Trust language creates a central dispute: whether it renews/incorporates the original secured indebtedness (Newman Deed of Trust) or only the vendor’s lien, affecting whether Summit foreclosure cut off Morfeld’s mineral reservations.
- The court resolves standing, trust formation, and the effect of the Summit foreclosure in varying degrees, ultimately remanding for further proceedings consistent with its opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| TAB Deed of Trust renewal scope | Llano/Wolfe: TAB renews and incorporates Newman Deed | Devon/Giesers: TAB renews all indebtedness incl. Newman Deed | Ambiguous; issue for fact-finder; summary judgment improper |
| Standing of Wolfe and Llano | Wolfe/Llano have mineral interests via trust or post-acquired title | Wolfe/Llano lack standing absent valid trust or mineral interest | Wolfe: after-acquired title sufficient; Llano: issues vary by claimant; standing conflicts resolved in part |
| Effect of Summit foreclosure on mineral reservations | Foreclosure cut off Morfeld mineral reservations | Reservations survive; subrogation may attach | Fact issue; summary judgment improper on whether foreclosure cut off reservations |
| Existence of express or resulting trust in Wolfe’s favor | Trust or resulting trust grants Wolfe mineral interest | No valid express trust; no resulting trust without payment evidence | As to Wolfe: issues unresolved; Ivera Morfeld affidavit excluded for Rule 166a(f) defects; as to Giesers: material issue raised |
| Declaratory judgments vs. trespass to try title | Declaratory relief proper to determine title and leases | UDJA not available to determine title; trespass to try title exclusive remedy | Declaratory relief limited to title; remand for further proceedings on remaining claims |
Key Cases Cited
- Nolana Dev. Ass’n v. Corsi, 682 S.W.2d 246 (Tex. 1984) (trust formation under Texas Trust Code; requirements for written evidence of trust terms)
- Winters v. Slover, 251 S.W.2d 726 (Tex. 1952) (-incorporation/merger doctrine in deeds of trust; renewal vs. incorporation)
- McGeorge v. Van Meter, 358 S.W.2d 580 (Tex. 1962) (second deed of trust may foreclose first and cut off prior mineral reservations under certain language)
- Allen ex rel. B.A. v. Albin, 97 S.W.3d 655 (Tex.App.-Waco 2002) (preservation of objections to summary judgment evidence; timing rulings)
- Esty v. Beal Bank S.S.B., 298 S.W.3d 280 (Tex.App.-Dallas 2009) (timing of objections to summary-judgment evidence; practice guidance)
- Rankin v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., 319 S.W.3d 58 (Tex.App.-San Antonio 2010) (review of objections to summary-judgment evidence after grant; plenary power timelines)
- Rogers v. Ricane Enters., Inc., 884 S.W.2d 763 (Tex.1994) (standing in trespass to try title; strength of plaintiff's own title)
- King Ranch, Inc. v. Chapman, 118 S.W.3d 742 (Tex.2003) (standard for determining title via common source; superiority required)