Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
GROVER SELLERS Al-rORNLY GINERAL hl Non. 01111 Culbarson, Ohalrram
Railroad Coxnlaoion 0r Tams
kuatln, Toxaa
1)4ar $1~ O&dnlon No. O-7046 ..~_-
,, ‘\
,,/:
suah sroaptlonr in only ona we&l to rant ~411 ohall b4 lQcret4d. /
Hauklna town8lt4.
applloanto ooto th0 0m4r or
Hon. GlIn Oulberson - ?sgs 2 llwi r8siainlng two lots w4re 14assd
arter dlsoorsry. to oth4r a4 Ol4oor4ry. All also 8rt8r parties,
lots am adJoinin& sad oontiguous. eubtllvldad lot8 Is prior in ml omer or ths rour wn4 or th4 appiiasnt*8 [188848] rro81 th8 origi- point ot time to th4 14ese on th4 oth4r two lots.
Thlr eppllsant oontends that ths les80x-s and.
orl@.nal owmrs oi th4 rour lots havs s right to at least one well on said rbur lots (The Ossmlsslon to thla oontantlon but he8 hersto- Is agreeable tore retused sppliostlons tar oae no11 011 essh or the two subdlrlbed lots); thst their 144se, being to tk4 leas4 on the other in point o? the prior two lots, they (the applioants) are entItle to a prior right to a permit as ocmpared with those holding a subrepuent lease on the other two lots.
'1 wish to ysln rapeat that the Oosuslsslon has held that oaly one well sari be drlllsd on these iour lots, and we have not berm oonsiderfa# the louatlon or ths well anywhere other than as shore-mentions&.
*At ths NQINIS~ oi applf4ants, the tOllowing law question is propouadedr of land is segrb-
wC,%LGTIGNz rdlhere 8 tM4t gat4d In areas *hi&# oannot be drilled exoept under exoaption to Rule 37, 4008 the holdar ot th4 rirat lease granted (oonslderatioxi of waste exaeptad) holder or hsrs a prhr right to perthit uvef a uubsepusnt lease?*
The desorlbsd iaot situstlon 18 an ultLgat4 resbilt of Rule and Its allowsble oxosptloas to or the applisation the Hawkins Fielil or East !B~xa8. 3~4 owner of the four lets Is entitled to but one w4ll. He oannot expand this right by & voluntsry rubdivision u&d thereby ozwita a rl6ht in hiaseli, of in a~ lessee, to an adbitlenal wall. Bun Oil 0smpan.y Vs. Railroad Commlsslon, 68 9. a. (24) 609. Nevertheless, the owner-lesso r had l e4n rit qndt an‘011 *ad gas lrase to two or the lots to one lessee, and. at lst4r dsta, an l ddltloa al
Hon. Olin Oulknoa - Page 3
lease on the other two lots to another lessee and without any exDMS* OOnV%yMoo Or his right to thr on4 wall to either lessee. % assume that the 011 and gas leasae to th4 two lesseea ~ployed the same and standard form with respeot to QrIlllng rights. researoh Indloates that the preolse question Extenslre at hsnd. ia one or rlrat impression. Is the sane of Railroad Ods*ioR, et al, *a. MillFr, 165 9, W. (26) 504, the court 8p~oifioallY reS~:m~d the question of the.legal erred or the two oIr4umstano4s: (1) small trsot whloh osn be dorrloped only under exseptlon to Rule 37 to proteot rested rights, and 85 SUSh entitled to but on4 well; and (2) the hota of a prior and OS a subsequent lease on subdltIslons of the tra4t without an express oonvaysnoe by the owner-lessor ot the right to the on4 l llswable well.
W4 are of the opinion that the legal etrest of the first lease in relation to the seoon&, in the respeots about whloh you lnqulr4&-wheth4r desmibed aa an Implied conveysmoe of the lesaor*s right to drill th4 one null, the granting to the first lessee or a prorerentlal right to drill suoh well, or otherwIse--1s to gir4 to ths first lessee prior right to a permit to drill as against the holder of the sub8equent lease. Th4 pronounowmnt or the Court ti Edgar, et al, vs. Stanollnd 011 & Gas Gompsny, 4t al, 90 8. W. (26) 656, writ refused, that a subsequent lessee "4ould insure no greater rlghd under the law than that vest4d in his lesaors~ Is persuaslYe by analogy..
It Is believed that frarp any approach to thb question, the first lsS444 la in the stronger legal and oqultable position. For example, under the applloatlon of' imputed notioe dootr$se (see 31 Tex. SW. pp. 363, 3641 Bsloher Land Mtg. 00. vs. 01-k. 238 s. W. 685)--iand 'ehs faotcand 4lrWWt4nO~are smple, in 0~ opinion, for its a plioatlon--the seoond lessee is ohar ed with notio4 of the rao t or the first lease, together with de sorollary ra4t that the lessor had pr4TIously dirested himuslf of auoh‘rights as wm granted In the 011 and gas less4, On4 of whloh Gas the right to drill. Therefore, under the faata stated in your Iauufr~,
,md expr4ssly limited fmoh raots. Your we8tion I* snrmr4d In the afflrmatire.
we express no opinion upon t&e question of th4 right* or we moon& leasee in event or dralnaao or hi* leasrhold by *4 Ron. Olin Culborean - Page 4 well (sea Magnolia Pet. Co.~rs. Blankenshlp, et al,
the first Fe+. (2Q) 5531, or upon any questiona whioh might subsa- quently aria4 oonosrnln(r. additional well8.
Yours very truly ATTORNZYOgagRALOFTEXAS BY
Asslstanf