Philpot v. Fields
| Decision Date | 03 March 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 9041,9041 |
| Citation | 633 S.W.2d 546 |
| Parties | Jimmie L. PHILPOT, Appellant, v. Bert FIELDS, Jr., Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Bailey C. Moseley, Moseley & Moseley, Marshall, for appellant.
Ruben K. Abney, J. Rodney Gilstrap, Abney, Baldwin & Searcy, Marshall, for appellee.
Is a land lease for a term of years and so long thereafter as the land is used for certain purposes unenforceable past the stated term because of an indefinite ending date? This is the only issue on appeal. The trial court, on stipulated facts, declined to declare the lease unenforceable. We affirm, holding that the lease is sufficiently definite and certain for enforcement.
On October 5, 1956, Florence Akin leased a 9.4 acre tract of Harrison County land to Bert Fields, Sr. The lease was filed in the Harrison County Deed Records. Jimmie Philpot now holds title to the land.
The lease is for a term of 20 years and so long thereafter as the lessee, his heirs, successors or assigns, may use the premises for the purpose of maintaining and operating a LTX separator, tanks and other machinery, appliances, and equipment in connection with the processing, refining, treating, and storing of natural gas and its derivatives, or other petroleum products. The lease provides for $75.00 annual rent.
Shortly after the lease was signed Bert Fields, Sr. put an LTX separator, tanks, other machinery and appliances on the land for use in processing, refining and treating natural gas and other petroleum products. Since the lease was signed, first Bert Fields, Sr. and then Bert Fields, Jr. continuously operated the separator and other equipment. All rent has been timely paid and the property has been used in compliance with the lease continuously since 1956.
Philpot argues that after the 20 year term the lease is indefinite, therefore a mere tenancy at will terminable by either party at any time. A tenancy at will is terminable by either party to a lease. Holcombe v. Lorino, 124 Tex. 446, 79 S.W.2d 307 (1935); Lea v. Hernandez, 10 Tex. 137 (1853); Hill v. Hunter, 157 S.W. 247 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1913, writ ref'd). Thus, if the lease creates a tenancy at will after the end of the 20 year term Philpot can now terminate. And, when one holds premises for an uncertain time, he is generally held to be a tenant at will unless the lease makes reference to some certainty. In Holcombe v. Lorino, supra, the court stated that leases for uncertain terms are prima facie leases at will.
After the expiration of the 20 year term this lease is of uncertain duration but does continue as long as rents are paid and the land is used for specific, definite purposes. We determine that the lease does not create a tenancy at will after the end of the 20 year term. It does not fall within the traditional concept of a tenancy at will. Restatement (Second) of Property § 1.6, comment g; § 1.7, comment b (1977).
For this proposition Morehouse relied on Hill v. Hunter, supra, and Lea v. Hernandez, supra. A review of the law and reasoning which requires a lease to be of a definite and certain duration is found in Nitschke v. Doggett, 489 S.W.2d 335 (Tex.Civ.App.-Austin 1973), vacated, 498 S.W.2d 339 (Tex.1973). The court in Nitschke...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Muzquiz v. Para Todos, Inc.
...Antonio 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.). On the other hand, leases with a perpetual term are not, per se , unenforceable. See, e.g. Philpot v. Fields , 633 S.W.2d 546 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 1982, no writ). Rather, leases with indefinite initial terms are treated as terminable at will by either party.......
-
Tri-County Elec. Coop., Inc. v. GTE Sw. Inc.
...the plaintiff's land”). This result is not undercut by the appellate court's reasoning in Philpot v. Fields, relied on by Verizon. 633 S.W.2d 546, 548 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 1982, no writ). The court in that case based its decision primarily on the intent of the parties as clearly expressed in......
-
Haley v. Gpm Gas Corp.
...of perpetual renewal. The lease is valid and enforceable and the trial court's holdings and findings are correct. Then, in Philpot v. Fields, 633 S.W.2d 546, 548 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1982, no writ), after noting that no legitimate reason exists to prevent parties from freely and intelligentl......
-
City of Altus v. Spears
...perpetual, and for only so long as the land is used for the definitely ascertainable purpose set forth within the lease. See Philpot v. Fields, 633 S.W.2d 546,548 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1982, no writ).The lease here is specific in expressing the rights, obligations, and duties of the parties.......