XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai
| Decision Date | 30 August 2011 |
| Docket Number | No. 02–09–00299–CV.,02–09–00299–CV. |
| Citation | 357 S.W.3d 47 |
| Parties | XTO ENERGY INC., Tommy J. Madewell, Patricia Madewell, Violet Joyce Renfro Kivimaki, Gary W. Yount, Shirley K. Stephens, Gregory Doyle Moseley, Sharlet Yvonne Holamon, Viola D'Ann Madewell, NASA Energy Corporation, Edith Madewell McCurrin, Tommy Roessler, Debbie Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Arthur Fred Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Gene Roessler, The Unknown Heirs of W.R. Madewell, Matilda Jones Madewell, and Paula Simon Madewell, Appellants, v. Leonard NIKOLAI and Sandy Nikolai, Appellees.andLeonard Nikolai and Sandy Nikolai, Appellants, v. XTO Energy Inc., Tommy J. Madewell, Patricia Madewell, Violet Joyce Renfro Kivimaki, Gary W. Yount, Shirley K. Stephens, Gregory Doyle Moseley, Sharlet Yvonne Holamon, Viola D'Ann Madewell, NASA Energy Corporation, Edith Madewell McCurrin, Tommy Roessler, Debbie Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Arthur Fred Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Gene Roessler, The Unknown Heirs of W.R. Madewell, Matilda Jones Madewell, Paula Simon Madewell, Winnifred M. Imboden, Estate of Ouilda Marie Madewell Baird (deceased), Wilson Oil & Gas Company, Sheron Lanelle Mitchell, Matthew Kirk Miller, Patricia Sue McNew Finch, Debra Kay Myrick, William Jay McNew, Wanda Ann Tubbs, Beverly Ann McNew Thompson, Pete Mitchell, Glennes Gerome Langford, William Don Madewell, Norman Edgar McNew, and Beverly E. McNew Smithie, Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Brandy R. Manning, Murphy Mahon Keffler & Farrier, L.L.P., Fort Worth, for Appellant/Appellee XTO Energy Inc.
Michael K. Hurst, Vanessa J. Rush, Gruber Hurst Johansen & Hail, LLP, Dallas, for Appellees/Appellants Leonard Nikolai, Sandy Nikolai.
Ronald O. Holman, Holman Robertson Eldridge, Dallas, for Appellants/Appellees Tommy J. Madewell, Patricia Madewell, Violet Joyce Renfro Kivimaki, Gary W. Yount, Shirley K. Stephens, Gregory Doyle Moseley, Sharlet Yvonee Holamon, Viola D'Ann Madewell.Misty M. Pratt, Michael L. Foreman, Brown Pruit Peterson & Wambsganss, P.C., Fort Worth, for Appellant/Appellee NASA Energy Corporation.R. Scott Alagood, Alagood & Cartwright, P.C., Denton, for Appellants/Appellees Edith Madewell McCurrin, Tommy Roessler, Debbie Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Arthur Fred Madewell, The Unknown Heirs of Gene Roessler, The Unknown Heirs of W.R. Madewell, Matilda Jones Madewell, Paula Simon Madewell.Charles C. Dorbandt, Charles Dorbandt & Associates, PLLC, Austin, for Appellee Winnifred M. Imboden.James R. ‘Jim’ Matthews, J.R. Matthews & Associates, LLC, Harrah, OK, for The Estate of Appellee Ouilda Marie Madewell Baird (Deceased).John G. Gaston, Gaston, Hemingway & Thanheiser, P.C., Houston, for Appellee Wilson Oil & Gas Company.Sheron Lanelle Mitchell, Matthew Kirk Miller, Patricia Sue McNew Finch, Debra Kay Myrick, William Jay McNew, Wanda Ann Tubbs, Beverly Ann McNew Thompson, Pete Mitchell, Glennes Gerome Langford, William Don Madewell, Norman Edgar McNew, Beverly E. McNew Smithie, pro se Appellees.PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and McCOY, JJ.
In three issues, the appellants that are listed above, other than Leonard and Sandy Nikolai, argue that the trial court erred by denying their motions for summary judgment and by granting the Nikolais' motion for summary judgment.1 The Nikolais contend that the trial court's summary judgment decision on the merits of their title and declaratory judgment claims was proper, but they argue in three issues that the trial court erred by not granting summary judgment on additional grounds, by making erroneous rulings on their objections to XTO's summary judgment evidence, and by failing to award attorney's fees. We affirm in part, reverse and render in part, and reverse and remand in part.
In 1882, Albert Shields ostensibly conveyed the following land to William Pippin through a deed (the “Shields Deed”):
92 1/2 acres of land situated in the County of Denton and 8 miles South of the city of Denton and being a part of the J.L. Rose 160 acre survey [ 2] beginning at a pile of Rock in the south B line of 160 acre survey made for Richard Knight dec'd 450 varas[ 3] East from his S.W. corner, from which a Post Oak brs North 38° W. 4 1/2 varas[.] Thence west passing said Knight's S.W. corner 1418 varas to a stake in the ... East B. line of a 320 acre survey made for William Gibson from which Post oak brs North 42° W. 20 varas. Post oak bears South 55° W. 8 1/2 varas on the said line 637 varas to a Post oak blazed on four sides, from which a Post oak bears North 41 1/2 ° East 6 varas Post Oak bears S. 72° E. 6 1/2 varas. Thence East 1418 varas, a stake from which a post oak brs S 32° East 14 var[a]s a Post oak brs north 20° E. 5 1/4[.] Thence North 637 varas to the place of beginning, to contain 92 1/2 acres of the East end of said 160 acre survey.
In 1904, W.R. and Matilda Madewell signed a deed (the “Madewell Deed”) that purported to convey land that was adjacent to the property subject to the Shields Deed. The Madewell Deed described the land that the Madewells attempted to convey to J.L. Goff as
all that certain lot track or parcel of land in Denton County Texas, and being all that part of the JL Rose 160 acre preemption survey lying west of 92 1/2 acres off the East part of said survey deeded to Wm Pippin by Albert Shields on Nov 28th 1882, the part here conveyed being 67 1/2 acres more or less of land off the west part of said Rose survey.[ 4] It being expressly understood that grantors reserve any and all minerals that may be in said land as well as the right to mine same, said grantors being responsible to grantees for any damage done to said lands by reason of mining on same. [Emphasis added.]
In 1922, Lon and Pearla Speer conveyed the same 67 1/2 acre tract to E.M. Madewell (through the “Speer Deed”).5 The Speer Deed recited, “It is thoroughly understood that the Mineral Rights upon this tract of land are not transferred by this instrument, same having been retained by W.R. Madewell in deed to J.L. Goff said deed dated Oct. 5 1904, recorded in ... Deed Records of Denton County, Texas.” In 1953, E.M. and Essie Madewell conveyed the same land to W.V. and Elizabeth Pippin. In 1971, the Pippins deeded the land to James Brockie (through the “Pippin Deed”). In its description of the property that was being transferred, the Pippin Deed expressly relied on the Speer Deed, which the Speers had executed almost fifty years earlier. The next year, Brockie conveyed the land to Rodney A. Williams (through the “Brockie Deed”). The Brockie Deed also relied on the Speer Deed.
In 1981, Williams conveyed 36.653 acres out of the same land to Leonard Nikolai (through the “Williams Deed”). The Williams Deed described the property being conveyed as a part of land “described in a deed from [Brockie] to [Williams] on the 11th day of February, 1972.” The contract by which Leonard bought the property stated, “Purchaser to receive all oil, gas, coal [,] and mineral rights on the property described herein.” 6 Leonard subsequently conveyed an undivided one-half interest in the 36.653 acres to Sandy.7
According to the Nikolais' pleading, in 2004, XTO contacted the Nikolais to express an interest in entering a lease concerning the minerals under the Nikolais' land. In 2005, however, XTO told the Nikolais that XTO had discovered the mineral reservation in the Madewell Deed and that the Nikolais did not own the minerals. In March 2007, a representative of Joint Resources Company (JRC) appeared on the Nikolais' property and informed them that JRC had a lease on the property's minerals and intended to drill a gas well there. In April 2007, JRC's attorney gave the company a title opinion stating that several individuals other than the Nikolais owned or had legally enforceable interests in the mineral estate on the property. The next month, the Nikolais' attorney sent an e-mail to JRC to explain the Nikolais' contention that they owned the mineral estate and to warn the company that if it drilled a well on the property, the Nikolais could seek legal action. JRC responded to the Nikolais' e-mail by sending the Nikolais' attorney a letter that stated in part that the company was
disturbed to learn, after months of attempting to accommodate Mr. Nikolai with an acceptable surface use agreement before exercising its legal right to drill a well on the oil and gas leases it owns, that Mr. Nikolai is now claiming to own not just the surface of the Subject Land, but the minerals as well, and accordingly is also claiming ... that the actual mineral owners of the minerals under the Subject Land, after being treated as owning the minerals by all persons in the chain of title to this property for over 100 years, own nothing.
Mr. Nikolai's claims are false....
....
Mr. Nikolai, by his unfounded claims, is slandering our client's title to its oil and gas leases, which leases our client is currently attempting to sell....
XTO, which apparently acquired the leases from JRC, agreed with JRC's position that the Nikolais do not own the minerals.8
In November 2007, the Nikolais sued XTO to quiet title, alleging that XTO's leases were invalid. They asked the trial court to declare that they owned, in fee simple and without reservations, the 36.653 acre tract because Leonard had acquired the property through a warranty deed, and the Nikolais had exclusively possessed the property since 1981.9 The Nikolais also contended that the Shields Deed and Madewell Deed were void for inadequately describing the property that they attempted to convey (therefore, the Nikolais asked the trial court to declare void a deed that is in their chain of title). Thus, the Nikolais argued that the mineral reservation contained in the Madewell Deed was ineffective and that their surface and mineral estates remained unsevered until Leonard acquired the land.10
XTO filed an answer that contained a general denial. Later, XTO filed a motion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Teal Trading & Dev., LP v. Champee Springs Ranches Prop. Owners Ass'n
...parties from taking positions contrary to those previously taken in prior documents. See, e.g., XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai , 357 S.W.3d 47, 56 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2011, pet. denied) (holding estoppel by deed precludes parties from alleging title "in derogation of the deed [or] deny[ing] t......
-
Walters v. Sporer
...Neb. 470, 36 N.W. 659 (1888).53 Elrod, supra note 41.54 Restatement (First) of Property, supra note 17, § 473.55 XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai , 357 S.W.3d 47, 56 (Tex. App. 2011), quoting Greene v. White , 137 Tex. 361, 153 S.W.2d 575 (1941).56 26A C.J.S. Deeds § 65 at 93-94 (2011). Accord, M......
-
State v. $90,235.00 in U.S. Currency
...summary judgment evidence, even if they are sworn to or verified within the pleading or motion. XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai, 357 S.W.3d 47, 60 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2011, pet. denied). A summary judgment affidavit which simply adopts the pleadings, including a motion for summary judgment, is ......
-
Orca Assets, G.P., L. L.C. v. Dorfman
...the trial court's finding that the 1929 deed was void ab initio, as moot.23 See Tex.R.App. P. 47.1 ; XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai, 357 S.W.3d 47, 59–60 (Tex.App.–Fort Worth 2011, pet. denied).ConclusionHaving overruled all of appellants' issues, we affirm the trial court's “Rule 166 Order on ......
-
CHAPTER 3 WHEN TO GO BEYOND RECORD TITLE - THE DUTY TO INQUIRE
...Surtees v. Hobson, 4 S.W.2d 245 (Tex. Civ. App.--El Paso 1928), aff'd, 13 S.W.2d 345 (Tex. Comm'n App. 1929); XTO Energy Inc. v. Nikolai, 357 S.W.3d 47 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 2011, pet. denied). A deed will operate to vest the after-acquired title of the grantor in the grantee if the deed i......