1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC v. Marathon Oil EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 29, 2023
Docket04-20-00304-CV
StatusPublished

This text of 1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC v. Marathon Oil EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC (1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC v. Marathon Oil EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC v. Marathon Oil EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC, (Tex. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas JUDGMENT No. 04-20-00304-CV

1776 ENERGY PARTNERS, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC, Appellants/Cross-Appellees

v.

MARATHON OIL EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC, Appellees/Cross-Appellants

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas Trial Court No. 17-02-00033-CVK Honorable Russell Wilson, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE WATKINS, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ, AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we REVERSE the portion of the final judgment declaring:

The Culberson-Hughes JOA does not require payment of existing obligations under separate JOAs to participate in the drilling of the Culberson-Hughes 2H, 3H, and 4H wells.

We RENDER judgment dismissing appellants 1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC’s claim for a declaration “that the Culberson-Hughes JOA does not require payment of existing obligations under separate JOAs to participate in the drilling of the Culberson- Hughes 2H, 3H, and 4H wells.” We also REVERSE the award of attorney’s fees to appellants and REMAND this matter to the trial court for a determination of whether appellants are entitled to an award of attorney’s fees under the parties’ remaining claims under the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act.

We AFFIRM the remainder of the judgment. We ORDER that appellees recover their costs of this appeal from appellants and from the surety on appellants’ supersedeas bond, if any. 1

1 The record does not indicate whether 1776 utilized a surety to supersede the trial court’s judgment. 04-20-00304-CV

SIGNED March 29, 2023.

____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice

-2-

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1776 Energy Partners, LLC and 1776 Energy Operators, LLC v. Marathon Oil EF, LLC and Marathon Oil EF II, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/1776-energy-partners-llc-and-1776-energy-operators-llc-v-marathon-oil-texapp-2023.