Masonite Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Bd., No. 45890

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
Writing for the CourtINZER
Citation240 So.2d 446
PartiesMASONITE CORPORATION v. STATE OIL & GAS BOARD of Mississippi, Earl R. Wilson and Hilton L. Ladner.
Docket NumberNo. 45890
Decision Date26 October 1970

Page 446

240 So.2d 446
MASONITE CORPORATION

v.
STATE OIL & GAS BOARD of Mississippi, Earl R. Wilson and
Hilton L. Ladner.
No. 45890.
Supreme Court of Mississippi.
Oct. 26, 1970.

Page 447

Peterson & Harper, Jackson, for appellant.

Brunini, Everett, Grantham & Quin, E. L. Brunini, Jr., John M. Grower, Jackson, for appellee.

INZER, Justice:

This is an appeal by Masonite Corporation from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Clarke County affirming an order of the State Oil & Gas Board granting appellees, Earl R. Wilson and Hilton L. Ladner, a permit to drill a well as an exception with full allowable in the Harmony Oil Field located in Clarke County. We affirm.

On July 14, 1969, appellees Wilson and Ladner filed their application for a permit to drill a well as an exception to the special filed rules of the Harmony Field. The application requested that the location be fixed at a point 300 feet from the west line and 200 feet from the south line of the south half of the northwest quarter of Section 21, Township 2 North, Range 15 East, on the unit designated as Benson-Kramer Unit 21-5. After due notice the State Oil & Gas Board, hereinafter referred to as Board, held a hearing on the application. Appellant Masonite Corporation and others appeared and objected to the granting of a full allowable for the well. None of the objectors contended there, and Masonite does not contend here, that the applicants were not entitled to drill the well as an exception.

The first factual question developed before the Board was the number of acres of this unit that were underlain by hydrocarbons. Wilbut Knight, an expert geologist, testified on behalf of applicants and it was his opinion that there was a minimum of 12.05 acres of this unit underlain by hydrocarbons, which would contribute to and was capable of delivering oil to the proposed well bore. Tom McGlothlin, an expert consulting geologist, testified on behalf of the objectors and it was his opinion that no more than three or four acres of this unit were underlain by hydrocarbons. He further thought that if the well were drilled at the proposed location it would not produce. A study of the testimony of these two expert witnesses reveals that their difference of opinion grew out of their opinion as to the location of the permeability barrier. A dry hole was drilled on the east half of this unit and there are producing wells on the units to the south and west of the unit in question. Both experts were of the opinion that the permeability barrier is located at some point on this unit.

The Board determined from the evidence that there were more than 11.5 acres of this unit underlain with hydrocarbons and granted appellees a permit to drill a

Page 448

well at the proposed location with a full allowable for the unit as provided by the provisions of Section 6132-21, Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (Supp.1968).

Appellant contends tht the circuit court erred in failing to hold (1) that the order of the Board was arbitrary and capricious and is contrary to public policy and is in contravention of the laws of the State of Mississippi ans the rules and regulations of the State Oil & Gas Board, and against the weight of the evidence; (2) that the order is arbitrary and capricious in granting a full allowable on the oil and gas produced, contravenes, and is in violation of the declared policy of the state as set forth in the conservation statute in that the order failed to protect the co-equal and correlative rights of the owners in the Harmony Field and fails to prevent waste as the term is defined in Section 6132-08(k), Mississippi Code 1942 Annotated (1952); (3) that the order is arbitrary and capricious and is in violation of the Constitution of the United States and the State of Mississippi.

We find no merit in the first two contentions made by appellant. It is unnecessary to belabor the point made by appellant that the order of the Board is against the great weight of the evidence. Suffice it to say that the standard in this state for judicial review of the order of the State Oil & Gas Board is well settled. In Superior Oil Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 220 So.2d 602 (Miss.1969), we restated the rule first announced in California Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 200 Miss. 824, 27 So.2d 542 (1946), and it is as follows:

The standard for judicial review of orders of the State Oil and Gas Board is whether the order is supported by substantial evidence, is arbitrary or capricious, beyond the power of the Board to make, or violates some constitutional right of the complaining party. (200 Miss. at 842, 27 So.2d at 546).

There is no doubt that there is substantial evidence to support the finding of the Board on this issue.

The order of the Board allowing the full allowable is not arbitrary and capricious and not in contravention of public policy of this state. The legislature provided by the provisions of Section 6132-21(c), in part, as follows:

(c) Each well permitted to be drilled upon any drilling unit shall be drilled in accordance with the rules and regulations promulgated by the board and in accordance with a spacing pattern fixed by the board for the pool in which the well is located, with such exceptions as may be reasonably necessary where it is shown, after notice and upon hearing, that the unit is partly outside the pool or, for some other reason, a well otherwise located...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Hall v. State, No. 57940
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 9, 1989
    ...Monaghan, 238 Miss. 239, 117 So.2d 881 (1960); Peterson v. State, 268 So.2d 335 (Miss.1972); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Board, 240 So.2d 446 (Miss.1970); Anderson v. Fred Wagner, etc., 402 So.2d 320, 321 (Miss.1981). And, as recently as 1984, in Mississippi Power Co. v. Goudy, 459 ......
  • Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Bd. of Mississippi, No. 55071
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • September 5, 1984
    ...Oil Corp. v. Southeastern Oil Co., 370 So.2d 225, 229 (Miss.1979) (quoting California Co.); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 240 So.2d 446, 448 (Miss.1970) (same); Superior Oil Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 220 So.2d 602, 603 (Miss.1969) The findings of an administrative agency like......
  • Correlative Rights and Limited Common Property in the Pore Space: A Response to the Challenge of Subsurface Trespass in Carbon Capture and Sequestration
    • United States
    • Environmental Law Reporter Nbr. 47-5, May 2017
    • May 1, 2017
    ...817 S.W.2d 36 (Tex. 1991); Grace v. Oil Conservation Comm’n of N.M., 531 P.2d 939 (N.M. 1975); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 240 So. 2d 446 (Miss. 1970). 258. For analysis on whether a “landowner has a suicient interest in the pore space to implicate the takings clause,” see Klass ......
  • McGowan v. Mississippi State Oil & Gas Bd., No. 07-CA-59604
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 24, 1992
    ...Oil Co., 370 So.2d 225, 229 (Miss.1979); State Oil & Gas Board v. Crane, 271 So.2d 84 (Miss.1972); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 240 So.2d 446, 448 (Miss.1970); Superior Oil Co. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 220 So.2d 602, 603 (Miss.1969); California Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 200 Mis......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
12 cases
  • Hall v. State, No. 57940
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 9, 1989
    ...Monaghan, 238 Miss. 239, 117 So.2d 881 (1960); Peterson v. State, 268 So.2d 335 (Miss.1972); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Board, 240 So.2d 446 (Miss.1970); Anderson v. Fred Wagner, etc., 402 So.2d 320, 321 (Miss.1981). And, as recently as 1984, in Mississippi Power Co. v. Goudy, 459 ......
  • Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp. v. State Oil and Gas Bd. of Mississippi, No. 55071
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • September 5, 1984
    ...Oil Corp. v. Southeastern Oil Co., 370 So.2d 225, 229 (Miss.1979) (quoting California Co.); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 240 So.2d 446, 448 (Miss.1970) (same); Superior Oil Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 220 So.2d 602, 603 (Miss.1969) The findings of an administrative agency like......
  • McGowan v. Mississippi State Oil & Gas Bd., No. 07-CA-59604
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • June 24, 1992
    ...Oil Co., 370 So.2d 225, 229 (Miss.1979); State Oil & Gas Board v. Crane, 271 So.2d 84 (Miss.1972); Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 240 So.2d 446, 448 (Miss.1970); Superior Oil Co. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 220 So.2d 602, 603 (Miss.1969); California Co. v. State Oil & Gas Board, 200 Mis......
  • Howard v. Estate of Harper ex rel. Harper, No. 2005-IA-00115-SCT.
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • October 26, 2006
    ...of the Legislature and have no powers other than those delegated to it by the Legislature. Masonite Corp. v. State Oil & Gas Bd., 240 So.2d 446, 449 (Miss.1970) (State Oil and Gas Board has only the powers delegated to it by the Legislature). Cf. Oktibbeha County Bd. of Educ. v. Town of Stu......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT