Rucks v. Burch, 7710.

• Decision Date: 12 November 1941
• Docket Number: No. 7710.,7710.
• Parties: RUCKS et al. v. BURCH.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

156 S.W.2d 975

RUCKS et al. v. BURCH.

No. 7710.

Supreme Court of Texas.

November 12, 1941.

Motion for Rehearing Overruled December 17, 1941.

Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Ninth Supreme Judicial District.

Action by Tom Burch against Elbert Jeans, George W. Sheffield, Jr., A. R. Rucks, and H. E. Middleton for the reasonable rental value of a drilling rig. A judgment for plaintiff against all of the defendants jointly and severally was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals on appeal by defendants Rucks and Middleton, 136 S.W.2d 252, and to review the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals, defendants Rucks and Middleton bring error.

Judgments of the Court of Civil Appeals and of the District Court against defendants Rucks and Middleton reversed, and judgment directed in their favor.

A. R. Rucks and Robert M. Lyles, both of Angleton, for plaintiffs in error.

Gilbert T. Adams, of Beaumont, for defendant in error.

CRITZ, Justice.

This case was finally tried in the District Court of Hardin County, Texas, with Tom Burch appearing as plaintiff and Elbert Jeans, George W. Sheffield, Jr., A. R. Rucks, and H. E. Middleton appearing as defendants. In the district court Burch sought a money judgment against all of the above-named defendants, jointly and severally, for the sum of $3,255 alleged to be due him as the reasonable rental value of a certain drilling rig owned by him and used by the above-named defendants as partners in the drilling of a certain oil well in Hardin County, Texas. The defendants, Rucks and Middleton, filed answer to Burch's petition. In this answer they specifically, and in due form, denied under oath the existence of any partnership of which they were members with Jeans and Sheffield.

The case was tried in the district court, without the intervention of a jury, and judgment was rendered for Burch against Jeans and Sheffield, Rucks and Middleton, jointly and severally, for the sum of $333. As a basis for his judgment the trial court found that Jeans, Sheffield, Rucks, and Middleton were partners in the conduct of operations in drilling a certain well for oil on leased premises in Hardin County, Texas, and were therefore jointly and severally liable for the reasonable rental value of the drilling rig belonging to Burch and employed in the drilling operations above mentioned. The trial court found the reasonable rental value of the drilling rig to be $333. On appeal by Rucks and Middleton to the Court of Civil Appeals at Beaumont the judgment of the district court was affirmed. 136 S.W.2d 252. Rucks and Middleton applied to this court for writ of error, and same was granted.

It is undisputed that Jeans and Sheffield were partners in drilling the well here involved. It is also undisputed that a rig owned by Burch was used in drilling such well, and that Jeans and Sheffield, as partners, were liable to Burch for the reasonable rental value of the rig in question. The sole question involved in this case is whether there is any evidence in this record to sustain a finding that Rucks and Middleton were partners with Jeans and Sheffield in the above-mentioned enterprise. On that question the facts are undisputed, leaving only a question of law to be decided.

The facts of this case show that on September 19, 1938, T. J. DeMerritt, trustee, executed and delivered to George W. Sheffield, Jr., an oil and gas mining lease covering five acres of land out of the Stephen Jackson Survey in Hardin County, Texas, in what is generally known as the Sour Lake oil field. The lease above mentioned was what is generally termed as an "Unless" lease, and terminated according to its own terms "Unless a derrick shall have been erected upon the land herein leased and actual operations of drilling a well have been started upon said leased lands within sixty (60) days from the date hereof, * * *."

On September 22, 1938, Sheffield executed and delivered to plaintiff in error Rucks an assignment to an undivided 1/12 interest in the above-described lease, "together with all personal property used or obtained in connection therewith." The consideration recited in this assignment is one dollar "and other good and valuable considerations." As we understand this record, Rucks actually paid a substantial sum in money for the above assignment. The above-mentioned assignment is set out in full in the opinion of the Court of Civil...