Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Ass'n., 1960-6599.
| Decision Date | 01 April 1936 |
| Docket Number | No. 1960-6599.,1960-6599. |
| Citation | 92 S.W.2d 435 |
| Parties | SHARPE v. LANDOWNERS OIL ASS'N. |
| Court | Texas Supreme Court |
This suit was instituted by plaintiff in error, Ben H. Sharpe, against defendant in error, Landowners Oil Association, a corporation, to cancel an oil, gas, and mineral lease on lands in Lamar county. A judgment in favor of plaintiff in error in the trial court was reversed and rendered by the Court of Civil Appeals. 61 S.W.(2d) 155.
The lease in question was executed by E. R. Stubblefield and wife, S. T. Stubblefield, to Landowners Oil Association January 1, 1930, and covered two tracts of land; one of 75 acres and the other of 172.15 acres. This lease was promptly placed of record in the county where the land was situated. Afterwards Stubblefield and wife conveyed to plaintiff in error, Sharpe, the 75-acre tract, and this suit was brought to cancel the lease on that tract. A copy of this lease was attached to and made a part of his petition. The lease, according to its terms, is still subsisting. Stubblefield and wife are not parties to the suit, although they presumably still own the 172.15 acres and have been receiving benefits under the lease.
It is settled beyond all question in this state that in a suit to cancel a written instrument all persons whose rights, interests, or relations with or through the subject-matter of the suit will be affected by the cancellation are necessary parties. Business Men's Oil Co. v. Priddy (Tex. Com.App.) 250 S.W. 156; McKay v. Phillips (Tex.Civ.App.) 220 S.W. 176; State National Bank v. Lancaster (Tex.Civ.App.) 229 S.W. 883; Dial v. Martin (Tex.Civ. App.) 8 S.W.(2d) 241. The absence of a necessary party in a suit for cancellation is fundamental and jurisdictional to such extent that it must be considered by this court. It being apparent from the face of the record in this case...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Shell Oil Co. v. Howth
...were not made parties to this suit. They were necessary parties to this action to cancel the original lease. Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Ass'n, 127 Tex. 147, 92 S.W.2d 435. The Court of Civil Appeals erred in holding that the rule announced in Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Kishi, Tex.Com.App., ......
-
Jennings v. Srp
...Lack of an indispensable party is fundamental error which can and must be noted by the appellate court. Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Ass'n, 92 S.W.2d 435 (Tex.Com.App. 1936, opinion adopted); Miller v. Davis, 136 Tex. 299, 150 S.W.2d 973 (1941); Petroleum Anchor Equipment, Inc. v. Tyra, 406 S.W......
-
Womack v. Berry
...o. j.).' (Emphasis added.) Miller v. Davis, 1941, 136 Tex. 299, 150 S.W.2d 973, 977, 136 A.L.R. 177. See also Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Ass'n, 1936, 127 Tex. 147, 92 S.W.2d 435. Miller v. Davis, 150 S.W.2d 979(18, 19), supra, 'Since we hold that the trustees * * * are necessary parties to th......
-
Crickmer v. King
...noted by the appellate court. Petroleum Anchor Equipment, Inc. v. Tyra, 406 S.W.2d 891 (Tex.Sup.1966); Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Ass'n., 127 Tex. 147, 92 S.W.2d 435 (Tex.Comm.App.1936). For the lack of indispensable parties, the judgment is reversed and remanded to the trial court with instr......
-
CHAPTER 9 STRATEGIES AND PROCEDURAL ISSUES IN ROYALTY CASES
...(Michie Supp. 1991). [168] Tex. Nat. Res. Code Ann. § 91.404(c) (Vernon Supp. 1992). [169] See Sharpe v. Landowners Oil Association, 92 S.W.2d 435 (Tex. Comm'n. of App. 1936, opinion adopted) (suit for cancellation of an oil and gas lease based on cessation of production). [170] Section 37.......