Petty v. United Fuel Gas Co.
| Decision Date | 18 May 1915 |
| Citation | 76 W.Va. 268 |
| Court | West Virginia Supreme Court |
| Parties | Petty v. United Fuel Gas Co. |
A clear, plain, definite and unambiguous contract cannot be varied by parol evidence of facts and circumstances known to the parties, which might have induced intent different from that expressed, or contemporaneous or subsequent conduct inconsistent with the terms used. (p. 270).
A covenant in an oil and gas lease, absolutely binding the lessee to complete a well on the premises within four months, and conditionally to complete three more within successive periods of three months, unavoidable delays after starting to drill excepted, and, upon failure to drill and complete them or any of them, to pay $100.00 "forfeit for each well above specified, which he has not then completed, or surrender the lease for cancellation," conditionally imposes one penalty for the non-drilling of each well, not successive penalties for each failure to be paid every three months. (p. 270).
Money paid under a mistake of law and with full knowledge of the facts cannot be recovered back. (p.271).
Payments made by an agent, acting within the scope of his authority, are binding upon the principal, under the law of voluntary payment. (p. 271).
Appeal from Circuit Court, Roane County.
Bill by R. R. Petty and others against the United Fuel Gas Company and others. From decree for defendants, plaintiffs appeal.
Affirmed.
Harper & Baker, for appellants.
C. C. Douthitt, and R. G. Altizer, for appellees.
poffenbarger, judge:
The bill, dismissal of which is complained of, sought specific performance of certain covenants in an oil and gas lease, in accordance with the interpretation the plaintiffs have put upon them. The dismissal and appeal are results of an opinion on the part of the chancellor as to the meaning of the words in which the covenants are expressed, different from that of plaintiffs and their counsel. Hence the disposition of the appeal turns upon the construction of the clause in question.
The lease, hearing date Aug. 14, 1908, was executed by R. R. Petty, M. A. Petty, his wife, and M. J. Petty to Joseph Hartman Jr., and demises to him, his heirs and assigns, a tract of land containing 530 acres, more or less, for oil and gas purposes, for the period of two years and as long thereafter as either oil or gas shall he produced under it. Hartman assigned the gas right to the United Fuel Gas Co., Dec. 15, 1908, after having completed one unproductive well on the premises. Later, in July, 1910, the United Fuel Gas Co. completed a second well from which gas has since been produced. Under the covenant in question, imposing forfeitures for failure to drill stipulated wells, the plaintiffs have received $1,600.00, all of which except $400.00 the gas company seeks to recover back by way of cross-relief, on the theory of payment under mistake as to matters of fact, In addition thereto, the rental on the producing well has been paid.
The clause of the lease containing the covenants involved reads as follows: "Second party covenants and agrees to locate all wells so as to interfere as little as possible with the cultivated portions of the farm and to commence operations for a well within thirty (30) days and complete the same within four (4) months from the date thereof.
It is understood that a second well shall be completed within three (3) months after the completion of the first well and that a third well shall be completed within three (3) months after the completion of the second well and that a fourth well shall be completed within three (3) months after the completion of the third well, unavoidable delays after starting to drill each well excepted, and upon failure on the part of the party of the second part to drill and complete the wells, as above specified, he shall pay one hundred dollars forfeit for each well, above specified,...
To continue reading
Request your trial