Charles Alford and Mary Lou Alford v. Robert Thomas McKeithen, EOG Resources, Inc. and Central Texas Land Services

Opinion

ACCEPTED 12-14-00262 TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 4/24/2015 2:16:04 PM CATHY LUSK CLERK

NO. 12-14-00262-CV

______________________________

FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS IN THE TYLER, TEXAS TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS 4/24/2015 2:16:04 PM AT TYLER, TEXAS CATHY S. LUSK Clerk

______________________________

CHARLES ALFORD and MARY LOU ALFORD, Appellants

VS.

ROBERT THOMAS McKEITHEN, EOG RESOURCES, INC. and CENTRAL TEXAS LAND SERVICES, Appellees

______________________________

Appealed from the District Court of San Augustine County, Texas

______________________________

APPELLANTS’ BRIEF

______________________________

TOM RORIE State Bar No. 17238000 210 North Street Nacogdoches, TX 75961 (936) 559-1188 FAX (936) 559-0099

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL

In accordance with Rule 38.1(a) of the TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE , Appellants Charles Alford and Mary Lou Alford provide the following list of all parties, and the names and addresses of all counsel:

Appellants: Charles Alford Mary Lou Alford

Counsel: Tom Rorie Attorney at Law 210 North Street Nacogdoches, TX 75961 (936) 559-1188 FAX (936) 559-0099

Appellee: Robert Thomas McKeithen

Counsel: Noel D. Cooper Law Offices of Noel D. Cooper 117 North Street, Suite 2 Nacogdoches, TX 75961 (936) 564-9000 FAX (936) 715-6022

Bill McWhorter Bill McWhorter & Associates 119 North Street, Suite A Nacogdoches, TX 75961-5200 (936) 564-2676 FAX (936) 564-6455

Appellees: EOG Resources, Inc.

Central Texas Land Services

Counsel: Jason R. Mills Graham K. Simms Jeff K. Heck Freeman Mills PC 110 N. College, Suite 1400 Tyler, TX 75702 (903) 592-7755 FAX (903) 592-7787

ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Identity of Parties and Counsel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii

Index of Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv

Statement of the Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi

Statement of Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

Summary of the Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

Point of Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The Trial Court Erred as a Matter of Law in Holding That an Exhibit Attached to a Warranty Deed With Vendor’s Lien was Wholly Incorporated by Reference into the Deed

Arguments and Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Argument . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Argument and Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Rules of Contract Construction Apply to Deeds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Basic Rules of Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

The Deed is Construed Against Grantors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Rules Adopted by the Courts on Incorporation of Documents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Is the Reservation Part of the Property Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

What Happens to the Matter That is Not Incorporated? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

What Was the Intent of the Parties? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Certificate of Compliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

iii

Certificate of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

iv

INDEX OF AUTHORITIES

Cases Page

Alford v. Kuhlman Electric Corporation 716 F.3d 909 (CA5 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Arnold v. Sentry Savings Association 633 S.W.2d 811 (Tex. 1982) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Bob Montgomery Chevrolet v. Dent Zone Companies 409 S.W.3d 181 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2013, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,8

Coker v. Coker 650 S.W. 2d 391 (Tex. 1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,4

Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation v. An Ning Juang MV 383 F.2d 349 (CA5 2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Guerini Stone Co. v. P.J. Carlin Construction Company 240 U.S. 264, 36 S.Ct. 306, 60 L.Ed. 636 (1916) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,6

Heritage Res., Inc. v. Nationsbank 939 S.W.2d 118 (Tex. 1996) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Hill & Combs v. First National Bank of San Angelo 139 F.2d 740 (CA5 1944) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Jones v. Sun Oil Co. 110 S.W.2d 80 (Tex.Civ.App.–Texarkana 1937, writ ref.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Lavaca Bay Autoworld, LLC v. Marshall Pontiac Buick Oldsmobile 103 S.W.3d 650 (Tex.App.–Corpus Christi 2003, no neg. writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Luckel v. White 819 S.W.2d 459 (Tex. 1991) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Maupin v. Chaney 163 S.W.2d 380 (Tex. 1942) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Ogden v. Dickinson State Bank 662 S.W.2d 330 (Tex. 1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

v

Owen v. Hendricks 433 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. 1968) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,5,6

Pritchett v. Gold’s Gym Franchising, LLC 2014 Tex.App. LEXIS 1281 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2014, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Ralston Purina Co. v. Barge Juneau and Gulf Carribbean Marine Lines 619 F.2d 374 (CA5 1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Ray v. Elder 2007 Tex.App. LEXIS 4170 (Tex.App.–Tyler 2007, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Reeves v. Towery 621 S.W.2d 209 (Tex.App.–Corpus Christi 1981, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Rice v. Cook 367 S.W.2d 386 (Tex.Civ.App.–Austin 1963, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Starcrest Trust v. Berry 926 S.W.2d 343 (Tex.App.–Austin 1996, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Sullivan v. City of Galveston 17 S.W.2d 478 (Tex.App. 1928, no writ hist.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Tribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM Constructors, L.P. 154 S.W.3d 639 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th] 2004, pet.rev.den’d.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Valence Operating Co. v. Dorsett 164 S.W.3d 656 (Tex. 2005) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Books and Treatises Page

Williston on Contracts § 30-25 (4th Ed.) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Codes, Rules and Statutes Page

TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE , Rule 9.4(i)(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE , Rule 38.1(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii

vi

STATEMENT OF THE CASE

Appellants brought suit against the Appellees seeking a judgment that they owned all the

interest in minerals in three tracts of land in San Augustine County that were owned by their grantors

as of the date they acquired those tracts.

Appellants filed a motion for summary judgment, which was denied by the trial court, raising

the same issue as raised in this appeal. They also filed a motion immediately before trial began for

the trial court to construe the deed as a matter of law. The court ruled that an exhibit to the deed was

incorporated for all purposes.

Trial before a jury was held on several issues, on issues of mutual mistake, limitations,

trespass to try title, etc. The jury failed to find mutual mistake. Based on the jury verdict the court

rendered judgment for the Appellees. Appellants filed a motion for new trial, which was denied.

This appeal was then perfected.

vii

STATEMENT OF FACTS

Appellants were acquainted with a Jack and Annie Jessup in San Augustine County who

owned three tracts of land. Appellants had leased the land and known the Jessups for many years.

In 2003 Annie Jessup told Mary Lou Alford she and her husband wanted to sell their land to them.

They reached an agreement as to price and that the Jessups would owner-finance the sale.

Annie Jessup went to a San Augustine Title Company to have documents prepared. A

Warranty Deed With Vendor’s Lien, Deed of Trust, and promissory note were executed. The

documents needed to close the transaction were executed on April 25, 2003. The deed is the

document in question in this suit (App. 1). It contained a section entitled “Reservations from

Conveyance and Warranty” in which was included the following language “For Grantor, a

reservation for the full possession, benefit, and use of Tract Two for the remainder of the life of

Grantor, as a life estate.” There was a space provided immediately below that section in which the

initials of all the parties were entered.

Attached to the deed was an exhibit, marked Exhibit A. The deed referred to this exhibit,

by saying in the description of Tract One the following: “and being more particularly described by

metes and bounds on Exhibit “A” attached hereto.”

Exhibit A contained photocopied descriptions of the tracts copied from older deeds. In

particular, it contained a description of “Tract One” which began with a property description by

metes and bounds but then, without any break or interruption, began stating a reservation of

minerals. The attorney who prepared the deed did not intend to include any mineral reservation (RR

59). The legal assistant who prepared the deed testified that she copied the description for an 1950

viii

deed and did not notice that it contained a mineral reservation (RR 27-32; App. 2).

Initially it was believed that Appellants owned the minerals under the tract. They were

approached to lease, and did lease, the minerals. A few years later they were notified that they did

not own the minerals after all, and once they learned they would not be paid for the minerals being

produced from their tracts they brought suit in District Court in San Augustine County against the

lessee and producer, EOG Resources, Inc. and the party who transferred the lease to EOG, Central

Texas Land Services, as well as against Robert Thomas McKeithen, who was an heir of the Jessups

and acted in a representative capacity for them. Both of the Jessups were deceased prior to trial.

ix

SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT

The deed conveying real property to Appellants did not reserve any minerals by the Grantors

even though there was a mineral reservation included on an attached exhibit, because the parties did

not intend to incorporate that exhibit for all purposes. The exhibit was attached solely for the

purpose of providing a metes and bounds description of the land being conveyed.

The primary goal of the court is ascertain the intent of the parties. When the parties had the

opportunity to reserve minerals in the deed itself and chose not to do so, and when the incorporation

of the exhibit was for a limited purpose, the effect of the exhibit is limited to its stated purpose only.

The court should strike from the deed in question and the exhibit any reference to a

reservation of minerals, as the parties’ intent was not to incorporate such a reservation. The court

should render judgment that Appellants are the owners of all minerals which were owned by the

grantors at the time of the execution of the deed.

x

POINT OF ERROR

POINT OF ERROR NO. 1:

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN HOLDING THAT AN EXHIBIT ATTACHED TO A WARRANTY DEED WITH VENDOR’S LIEN WAS WHOLLY INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO THE DEED.

2

ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES

ARGUMENT

Point of Error No. 1: THE TRIAL COURT ERRED AS A MATTER OF LAW IN HOLDING THAT AN EXHIBIT ATTACHED TO A WARRANTY DEED WITH VENDOR’S LIEN WAS WHOLLY INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE INTO THE DEED.

ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES

This case tests the limits of incorporation of a document into another document. The

instrument in question is a Warranty Deed With Vendor’s Lien executed by Jack P. Jessup and wife,

Annie Elizabeth Jessup, to Appellants dated April 25, 2003 (App. 1). The deed identified three tracts

of land in San Augustine County, Texas. The deed itself made no mention of any reservation of

minerals; in fact the parties all initialed a section of the deed regarding reservations from the

conveyance and it does not mention minerals. The issue is the effect of an attached Exhibit A. That

page contains a metes and bounds description for “Tract One,” but also includes in that description

a reservation of minerals, which the evidence showed was copied, in error from an old deed (App. 2).

That the inclusion of the reservation of minerals was a mistake is clear. The attorney who

prepared the deed stated there was no intent to include the mineral reservation. (RR Vol. 4, p. 59).

The legal assistant who copied the attachment and attached to the deed testified that she did so in

error. (RR Vol. 4, pp. 27-32). She copied the property description from a prior deed to the property

executed in 1950 and failed to see the reference to a mineral reservation in the description.

Appellants filed a motion for summary judgment contending that as a matter of law the

reservation of minerals was not incorporated into or part of the deed (App. 3 and 4). They renewed

that argument at the time of trial by filing a motion to construe the deed (App. 7). The trial judge

3

ruled that Exhibit A was entirely incorporated into the deed (App. 8). After that ruling the case was

tried to a jury on the theory of mutual mistake, and Appellants lost (App. 9 and 10). Appellants filed

a motion for new trial raising again the issue of construction of the deed (App. 11). The motion for

new trial was denied (App. 12).

The question is as follows: Does a reference in a deed to an attachment which incorporates

it for a specific purpose also incorporate it for any or all other purposes?

RULES OF CONTRACT CONSTRUCTION APPLY TO DEEDS

A deed is a form of contract, and construed in the same manner. The courts have been

consistent in holding that the rules of construction of contracts are the same as those that apply to

deeds or other instruments of conveyance. Arnold v. Sentry Savings Association, 633 S.W.2d 811,

815 (Tex. 1982); Starcrest Trust v. Berry, 926 S.W.2d 343, 351-352 (Tex.App.–Austin 1996, no writ

hist.).

BASIC RULES OF CONSTRUCTION

The basic rules of contract construction are well established. First, the primary goal is to

determine the actual or true intent of the parties as they have stated it in the instrument. Coker v.

Coker, 650 S.W. 2d 391, 393 (Tex. 1983). In order to give effect to all the language or provisions

included in the document they executed the court should examine and consider the entire document

and all its provisions. Valence Operating Co. v. Dorsett, 164 S.W.3d 656, 662 (Tex. 2005).

Contract provisions are to be given their ordinary and accepted meanings unless the document

indicates the parties intended to use them is some technical or specific sense. Heritage Res., Inc. v.

Nationsbank, 939 S.W.2d 118, 121 (Tex. 1996). Even if parts of the instrument appear to be

4

contradictory or inconsistent, the court must attempt to harmonize those provisions to give effect to

all of them. Luckel v. White, 819 S.W.2d 459 (Tex. 1991). The court should avoid a construction

that if possible makes any provision meaningless. Coker v. Coker.

With respect to a description of real property, it has been said that “[the sole purpose of the

description of property, as contained in a deed of conveyance, is to identify the subject matter of the

grant.” Maupin v. Chaney, 163 S.W.2d 380 (Tex. 1942); Rice v. Cook, 367 S.W.2d 386

(Tex.Civ.App.–Austin 1963, no writ hist.).

THE DEED IS CONSTRUED AGAINST GRANTORS

If there is a reservation in a deed in favor of a grantor it must be most strongly construed

against the grantor and in favor of the grantee. Reeves v. Towery, 621 S.W.2d 209, 212

(Tex.App.–Corpus Christi 1981, no writ hist.). The same rule applies if the language used in the

deed was doubtful in intent. Jones v. Sun Oil Co., 110 S.W.2d 80 (Tex.Civ.App.–Texarkana 1937,

writ ref.). If the trial court was not certain of the intent of the grantor in reserving minerals, then

Appellants should have received the benefit of any doubt.

RULES ADOPTED BY THE COURTS ON INCORPORATION OF DOCUMENTS

Courts have explained the rule of incorporation of documents in ways that appear to create

a conflict.

One line of cases is that represented by Owen v. Hendricks,433 S.W.2d 164 (Tex. 1968); Ray

v. Elder, 2007 Tex.App. LEXIS 4170 (Tex.App.–Tyler 2007, no writ hist.); Pritchett v. Gold’s Gym

Franchising, LLC, 2014 Tex.App. LEXIS 1281 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2014, no writ hist.). Those cases

5

recite the language of Owen v. Hendricks:

It is uniformly held that an unsigned paper may be incorporated by reference in the paper signed by the person to be charged. The language used is not important provided the document signed by the defendant plainly refers to another writing.

This line of cases seems to say that stated purpose for an attachment is not material: if the

attachment or extraneous document is referred to at all, it comes in.

A second lines of cases holds that other documents, whether attached or incorporated by

reference, are only considered for the purpose given by the parties themselves. In Guerini Stone Co.

v. P.J. Carlin Construction Company, 240 U.S. 264, 36 S.Ct. 306, 60 L.Ed. 636 (1916), the United

States Supreme Court held that “[A] reference by the contracting parties to an extraneous writing for

a particular purpose makes it a part of their agreement only for the purpose specified.”

Several decades later the United State Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit adopted Guerini

in a construction case. Hill & Combs v. First National Bank of San Angelo, 139 F.2d 740 (CA5

1944). The court said:

While a reference in a contract to plans and specifications imports them into and makes them a part of the contract, it is quite well settled that such a reference is not effective beyond the agreement of the contract and that if the contract contains qualifying words, they will be given effect, and the reference limited accordingly.

Thus the Fifth Circuit held that the rule of Owen v. Hendricks is limited: a mere reference is not

enough to incorporate the entire extraneous document or attachment, but the court must give the

incorporated matter the effect the parties intended. If the words qualify the intent of the

incorporation, the court must limit its effect to what the parties agreed. That court has consistently

followed that rule: See Ralston Purina Co. v. Barge Juneau and Gulf Carribbean Marine Lines, 619

6

F.2d 374, 375-376 (CA5 1980), and Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation v. An Ning Juang MV, 383

F.2d 349 (CA5 2004).

More recently, in Alford v. Kuhlman Electric Corporation, 716 F.3d 909, 914 (CA5 2013),

the Fifth Circuit said “it is important to note that when incorporated matter is referred to for a

specific purpose only, it becomes a part of the contract for that purpose only, and should be treated

as irrelevant for all other purposes,” citing Williston on Contracts § 30-25 (4th Ed.). Thus the court

is now saying that the extraneous matter does not come in automatically, but only the part the parties

intended to incorporate for the stated purpose: the remainder is disregarded.

Texas courts have long recognized the Guerini rule. In Sullivan v. City of Galveston, 17

S.W.2d 478, 490 (Tex.App. 1928, no writ hist.), the court held that an attached document which

provided the interest rate on some bonds was only incorporated for the purpose of supplying the

interest rate and no other reason. Therefore, the court said that “the paper had no effect upon the

obligation of the parties expressed in the bond itself, other than to supply the evidence of the rate of

interest.”

In Tribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM Constructors, L.P., 154 S.W.3d 639 (Tex.App.–Houston

[14th] 2004, pet.rev.den’d.), the court adopted the Guerini rule, citing a number of cases that have

followed it.

More recently another Texas Court of Appeals has touched on the seeming conflict between

the language of Owen v. Hendricks and Guerini. In Bob Montgomery Chevrolet v. Dent Zone

Companies, 409 S.W.3d 181 (Tex.App.–Dallas 2013, no writ hist.), the Dallas court first cited Owen

v. Hendricks for the proposition that documents can be incorporated into an agreement of the parties,

even if they are unsigned, as long as the signed document “plainly refers” to the incorporated

7

document. But then the court added:

No Texas case has expressly held that the complete incorporation by reference of another document requires the original document show the parties intended for the referenced document to become part of the contract. However the requirement for such a showing is supported by the general principle of contract law that reference to a document for a specific purpose incorporates that document only for the specified purpose.

IS THE RESERVATION PART OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIPTION?

Another issue is whether or not the reservation of minerals is in effect a part of the property

description. A reservation of minerals has the effect of reducing what is conveyed under the deed.

So in theory it does affect the description of the land if it limits or reduces the quantity of land

conveyed. Therefore, “the following tract of XX acres with the minerals reserved” would define

what is being conveyed.

In the case before the bar the deed is complete in itself: it identifies the parties, conveys the

land, and provides an sufficient description of the land. What then is the purpose of the attachment?

It is to provide a metes and bounds description as a supplement to the shorter, more general

description of the land.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THE MATTER THAT IS NOT INCORPORATED?

In this case the parties stated that they were attaching Exhibit A for the sole purpose of

providing a metes and bounds description. So what happens to the old mineral reservation that the

legal assistant copied from the older deed and included because she failed to read to the end of the

page?

8

In Bob Montgomery Chevrolet, Inc. v. Dent Zone Companies the court held that since it had

found that a document regarding information on the internet was not incorporated into the agreement

between the parties, that a clause in question, a forum selection clause, was not part of their contract.

Therefore, it ruled that the forum selection clause was not binding and had no effect.

In Lavaca Bay Autoworld, LLC v. Marshall Pontiac Buick Oldsmobile, 103 S.W.3d 650

(Tex.App.–Corpus Christi 2003, no neg. writ hist.), the court found that since two provisions of the

contract conflicted, and the court can resolve that conflict by striking down one of the provisions,

that it had authority to strike down a writing in the contract so that no conflict existed.

In Ogden v. Dickinson State Bank, 662 S.W.2d 330 (Tex. 1983), the court held that when two

provisions in a contract appear to be in conflict they should be harmonized if possible. In this case

that is not possible, some provision has to go to avoid the conflict. That provision is the mineral

reservation, the provision the parties did not intend to bind them.

In this case the court cannot reconcile both the evidence of intent of the parties to reserve

only a life estate in one of the tracts, but reserve no minerals, with the entire language on Exhibit A.

But the court can reconcile the deed with only the metes and bounds description. Therefore the court

should order the mineral reservation stricken from Attachment A to the deed.

WHAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE PARTIES?

The primary goal of construction of any document is to ascertain and give effect to the intent

of the parties. What evidences their intent?

! the parties indicated by their action that they considered any reservation from the

conveyance important by setting aside a section of the deed for that subject with its

9

own title

! the parties indicated by their action that they considered any reservation from the

conveyance important by each initialing the section that covered that subject

! the deed was complete in itself, i.e. there was no necessity to refer to any attachment

to complete the terms and provisions of their agreement

! the parties initialed the section of the deed that referenced reservations from the

conveyance, but they did not initial or sign the reservation of minerals on the

attachment

! the person who prepared the deed testified that the attached mineral reservation was

not attached intentionally but in error

! the parties limited the purpose of the attachment to the deed to only providing a

metes and bounds description

! the parties gave no indication in the deed itself that they intended to incorporate any

provision of the attachment as a provision of the deed itself.

For these reasons the only logical conclusion regarding the intent of the parties is that they

intended that the grantors reserve one thing only, a life estate as to one tract, and that Appellants

receive all their other interest in the property.

CONCLUSION

The trial court erred in construing the deed to Appellants by holding that the mineral

reservation found in the metes and bounds property description was incorporated for all purposes.

This case should never had gone to a jury, but rather should have been decided as a matter of law,

10

of contract interpretation. The court should reverse the judgment of the trial court and render

judgment that the mineral reservation included on Exhibit A to the deed in question is of no effect

and is struck, and that all minerals of the grantors in that deed passed to Appellants.

The court should remand to the trial court the issue of Appellants’ damages for the removal

by any other parties of the minerals from the tracts conveyed to them, as well as damages to the

surface of those tracts.

Appellants request that all costs be taxed against the defendants and that they have such

other relief as they may be entitled to receive.

Respectfully submitted,

Tom Rorie Tom Rorie State Bar No. 17238000 210 North Street Nacogdoches, TX 75961 (936) 559-1188 FAX (936) 559-0099

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

Pursuant to TEXAS RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.4(i)(3), I hereby certify that this brief contains 2,459 words (excluding any caption, identity of parties and counsel, statement regarding oral argument, table of contents, index of authorities, statement of the case, statement of issues presented, statement of jurisdiction, statement of procedural history, signature, proof of service, certification, certificate of compliance, and appendix). This is a computer-generated document

11

created in WordPerfect, using 12-point typeface for all text. In making this certificate of compliance, I am relying on the word count provided by the software used to prepare the document.

Tom Rorie Tom Rorie

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that a copy of the foregoing document has been served on counsel for Appellees this 24th day of April, 2015, by e-file service.

Tom Rorie Tom Rorie

NO. |]- r4-00]61-cv

IN THE TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS AT TYLER" TEXAS

CHARLES ALFORD and MARY LOU ALFORD.

Appellants

VS.

ROBERT THOMAS McKEITHEN. EOG RESOURCES. INC. and CENTRAI- TEXAS LAND SERVICES.

Appellees

Appealed fioni the District Courl of San Augustine County, Texas

APPENDIX TO APPELLANTS' BRIEF

I'OM RORIE State Bar No. 17238000 21 0North Street Nacogdoches, TX 75961 (e36) sse-1 I 88 FAX (e36) 559-00ee

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANI'S

ORAL ARGTIMENT REQUESTED

APPENDIX

No. Document

1 Warranty Deed with Vendor's Lien from .f essup to Alford dated April 25.2003

2 Warranty Deed fiom Fountain, Burns. and Jessup to Jack Jessup dated May 24.1950

3 Plaintiffs' Motion for Summary Judgment

4 Order Denying the Altbrds' Motion fbr Summary.ludgment

5 Plaintifl's' Third Amended Original Petition

6 Plaintiffs' First Supplemental Petition

7 Motion fbr Court to Construe Document Prior to Evidence and Submission of Issues to Jurv in Trial

8 Order on Construction by Court of Warranty Deed fiom Jack P. Jessup and Annie Elizabeth Jessup to Charles Alford and Mary Lou Alfbrd dated April 25"2003

9 Jury Verdict

l0 Judgment

11 Motion fbr New Trial

12 Order Denyins Plaintifls" Motion fbr New Trial

.''l .t r 't -.-,

;$!g#ril,4';,Lrrios :,il1.,j,11".[i { "u';Ft'

.wa*i"r4i{t-trel!! a,, rlt_|._rlaJ,ld.d,y'*_.oiir,ii,ur _wqg_yr.,ql}ic{i,Ell1,.Lr

)inte; april 15, 2003

Grauton iAeI( p, JESS;LrP, oto.,,,tu,,u .r6n10y r, rz, r'g11

6rairteer cirARLEI,.

/irrer re,, ilfi ;,ff l;11'

"""u' r, ijr>'" t64' rir'rr;rLrgrrriri.ne, sui rrul Ar,IroRrr) nr,, wl}-li, .'l: $rsh(0 c'l'!i' 'l'e*s 759?2 '^}r{I) ",,..,, M.Ai(y L0L,- ai,F.[)J{D Griy-1tr*,0 Mnlr{ng A,rrir'cor (iJ:)

ttrelttdln'rj c.utit'l): Itorr1ll 1' 1i6x e0nulderstioDi '529, srir Arilu'til,;, irr;\!rg:n1''

corur,/ .i.{rx,ls.rsg?,r lltJlJf;?rii,[i';.i",li,i:: 1, r,o: L,Lts i"( )0 r:r v'itpl c"rir.dr-nriu.J,u.;r ',,'ui'tr,', ;., l,,,t"l ;];i,,,;J,,;l't R.rto.r)8i11. -..

!:l ol:*of f rnrr ,i, .u,,,,, ,t*;tf:l,lli-i, ;;;il:t ;X t;:l,,li::ii-l;,il,Ji];,ii,j,l,iliiil,i,i,ill,i;,f i,::ll,ii l,X,,.,i,T::;?l,iu,,,f il,H,,n**." ,,, , '#Tf;r,:llijf'r,+r, r,i ir,rr,,, rLi,c,,1" :

:3,i:"'ft'.'.Tl;r:l]:,, l't','"r'-- (\,,,u rc.LL. . ,, "i, ,'.;:'.''l;,,,:"x,'lil."l,1r,lji:"1;,tiliJ; l"f*tuu'.r",il.,i ;;,"l,iir,t;,j.;,;:X;:!l;li JJ;#;":]:f#,;,,:.'l,ir,t;,',: u,, "lili,. i.,, n,.,.,,.,";,, .,,.,: ,,i,i ;;;,;i,..;li:;;: ,,,,;:;r,;;;,,,,1r, Trr.Af)? ?r,?L!r

,;'i;,,*,:,,,r-

*il*lfi*,',mf'$ j,i,, i i, i;i'i[+:*irilj,i:$*,ll

I

iH*-itr,T, :frq#nTf,ljillt:fiiti.l;ilrffirr1r;iu;:ffi,lr,,,ii;,*il,il,irT ir"i,;:illtr ,:illT; ;:Jli: :;;:;:i'"'-,,r 'I,.',',ij ,; ,6 j, , "

,,,, ,"1,;;!. ,, ,.,, ,^0.o, ,;ntr:r nr r-,c ,.r

r;'ffi,*#il'Tt;::lii:lli,,,r,i .;: ; ,.:,': .. ,, ''.,;;,;,r-r,,"*;;, F.ln"At,:,j;i.;',;l;',ji,,il'j*;,,,,,; ln,,,,,, 0 '

-,4diiit$d,$,*1,l i;{ -:;,, i,,;i,,.':i }r*,.

ii[' i- :*,,,-#t:

yg,n:::::*l;'iv;il*d;;i;ff.Jit),:lJ;:'rjJ,ll,ii$l;jru*;jii:l;:;iijl*i'flf]iti,,ffilij

r;elurjr: t)ir; plilLrti,

), !la', :tu;h,rri "l/&,n J,,(; €;;=t':: lr-, /'

;.,2 (=r >., L (t )

PLAINTIFFS' EX}{tBIl'A

ti;i;t

'"'l-' .,'-1!1d.._l r)Al[i;

,,.!lt:r.o:; ,;i;rc _,,.,;1 )*,,:1, '"

:,.,.'',- l'.1'utiu;'' ;rl ,u :::i I !i'l :"' !

;ifl*H lly";;, ,j,': i*;q*;;;,tli-i;'*il['iiii r,;tr#i:, '

;'-"

, u**i. :.irtF';ffifli;': ii'ii;l:!ii ifffn:-;j$:r,r,Bll-:ii;qi-iffi;i,r'i,,,,idil;

:;i;f; ;;jil il:ilil-;;,i"::i;,"

;;" l

i

ffi::l'11.:111,'iiii .'^iin'l.'$'i:i;j{.'i;:iii'|ii', ;",;' :1; ;1 il;,i1'i,;"ii ;'irii ;'

iF li+iJ|'lsrli l**l,f ';if:' iii,l:fli,il*;Ulii,:

fi - ;il.'l, #1r,;;i,ii'.,,i;,i,, 6f;ffr.;"[ilf u*,"i*,niliJl_tl',$,iil,lrl,ruirui':"i;

lL':,1,i;,u,;t:;i,.;l;,:i;"::,;ll:tou;;.1_..i.=..

i.1 |

tlis'i e €:,uq!t1 ,nrac, J loi oo .)r, ))it?i)0r ,,. ,_ . ..

c'i' "l''vtrl , i'1"''L,,lg(r o: r-nd e,. :rafn cl. i'ri.,'Llrlg(r r't'

r.r, 5r'. aI .li ,rr,, I 5r.. 'iiurl'u'iiti;']'i:tu .r^,..

.iiur,r,u,iji;l i,,, 0orinlr' , trefrger pgd 1;eiag 'o'nttr' tot"'o'rrt Roxitsr bei116 :l ep,

l

thc : rr;' o''o't' Jl"'.'""''" "r:i'l'rr: "'e'rr i'i{ 1;r',r iTef it ol su"' ;"ut;;'r.*, 'i olri ::"'''n f,jharp jeae)rp ru* \.1.J,0.,d i

,1,"11,,:il i;',,.il.'; ,l ::.:j:;il ;ff:,.:::::;,:, ", ;;;,i;J,:,.1:

- '' r'2 t(ri'. !!'tj'cir ,li ,,}i,,T.. l

ili\d' i)e'1.h. i SEGillN:FG at 2 eitrr'e 1iI i a;ror.r,r..c ,r r!,..,-..

t" 7:i i\o)''e,r; ' !'/'i ri

'"'rio*.11 ,,' ."i ,',;,",l ,,l 'r{ c,-,,,.

'.res.,i Q,:.. ,.0i

1

,.;r.'1,,-:i: f .r,rou iir.,;l ii

ffil:: ;:;.;; l:,::.".,,i;l;;:;l,i;":i,,,;:';;

*, ;:.,I;i;

;;,";; i

''// (\('l'' \/'i 290 l'l''l f('lrb ii

llEii'ca st 3:ujr.! 'etlt il.,-''ai:r.41. rr:.'i; ;:rrrr ,rr,, j ii

;;; ",,:,,;;'i,r:

"rrraa*, ir corr',iai!ridrJ ? acree ,"::-":lt,;"un""""',.,rr',,,''.0 :;r";;;r';:':r:i:";;:;;^r, ll

ll

:Xl,1i'.i, i' A

:! xllj.LATri C At Rh1. , 0F i.rixAi., wur\ I Y \); lAN A:J(-.t.

.l.rj\;

,. r"i, tr*'iT,i",'rlJ?;i#i:;fj::'viedg*l belore ule by rAcl( p r;rssu,! ANjr, !rri:,., /r I\NLII rJ'u'i!8811'l

'

t-.:.t-;,.:-r:..:-.',i\.;..)i)::.::rr-j,..../.:_-r. JIi$ri\Jp, /')

I rA:+ '',';,'r!-il . t, .\,n{ ( .( l:

'r:J-,, it,.".

pitr:paeffrivtifli,l.n,obol,.rr.:;;:f , \1' n",i:!n,,)/!_,,_#,)t!,),ur,,r,r., ,;\,'r,'ii rt' r('r ,:,i.,, ? "' ., .; . "

AFrER,*.",oR_D x?:x;l?i} ;,t,li} :^ll'i] : ?:,.rl i it jr j;r;.., ,riolo.or.rl. li.l_,il,,n o 0,. nun*,, r;crt . I

:'r!'l al.t

'l'ltr. ii'li'llfii 0t ',['.11,:(,trlii,I co uN'l' y [tinout,r't.Ll lvLcn r_,r, !.:.e.i J i1.rttrttit.lri.i,i tt. . ..I

i.a::y lr',j1)nl;:;.'l : [t::i r't:1.f cr jr'il.:ru:rio itouil,i;aJ.:,n()

::;l; ::: ,,,r .Lf o ll:rci il o l; ;; u 1:

,C) o3g1"rr,i &.nd w:rJ,(j

oi ilte Couni;, 6! ll,t 1l iilli'rrijlj I.iro , l,t1Lc,r; -riirlillJ toi aitc.L ii.l colsrder.atrol ihe sliu ol oL l'f (; ':'{ii;i.l,.r I irt) r\!:'t rilrj lji.tr.rr:l.i,i.t,_i ,,1.,.it,1.;.,r,i l.iilij!l}..r!

riirl irol' lr)fl (11;ltlii,ii" tlit

i

DOl,r,tiIiS,

il ll [i i)a|iL. all(i seclrLcd t0 itr: 1;aii;,, ir1 Lj.ael lr; , (:r ,! ,.t Lt l')

i, 'i rill iair.liji t,.r' ls.olirr*s:

'ilt:i- 1'11 , . t,)t.)\) ,r)i_.r i1;.;. . ij,.t i,ii-.i I i.ii1) t'(lj0.'rl,/,.a i) ' nri'] rlii t ';

r i.r,L i11r.,11 1;;

.,

!jL:,ll (-t r,i l.r I ;:i'

I l:l','.l1tll iiji.-.':':,) t1...:,;, rir .;i.r:t1i{j,r,,.),.i ;r,:i,r ,:,,.,{;'l,i]',,;.,.1;i;l*';,; lr:i;,;,,::l,,il'J.;."1;;;',iil.il,l;lt:;;',,'

rjiirl;., '1"i:;)i!r;i ir1.

l.l',:'lt' r; ij'rr', jr ,j 1).i 1.r i-trrt.L i;,.lrlj !rir i\ Ji.,; i]l il:ltt l)'i;'i;11",''

'"'r' );ri;i, -itl, i'i1]'ll ', r'|rt\,.'.','). :i or ::,, ,,,'';]ll;'ti]: iit'l,i:ii,,.]t,ililtt,,tTgi]t- ;;jj, ';;i,;' ,1,;,,,;'; ,l-1, l',i,,,|f],,,1;;1,,, 1,,:: ll:l "1:,,11::Ji,l',,; xl,i;j, .,., l.!i, ,., ::i;rr 1..:;:i Lllr,./,,.;,ii,,;.r,j.{:i.ri.ril tll:iJill iJ.tl'r r}ir (/:t'l)oi.'n.r-i)

s,r\r{:,:rr.irjlr'j(r irL:.r))i,r i.;r'.i.'';;.r,,, i.,, . r" ciriiirr-i;'i I]:ll,i; i).rl;r,i,,i) i.r,i,,l,ri,i"i,oilir;!-,,ii;]: i]lft,;; , i't''r Jjf r' '1jiiirr,1!ri.| :ir;,i,eJ'a'ir i; )l{" r.rilr.r.r,j {,r.,.-L r. .r,;.;" ,:r ii ir.j ::ir ,f,Ln1:i1,, .:jl

ll:l ;i::;i;,'";jr,,i"',u"il:l u'i,,,' ,-,,;,,ui.1,i,,,,'.,, ,.,,'., ,;;.;l;;;;,,,1,,::lr'i'ir ni.a(:rri!l il;y i.,,,i;1 ),,,{,yii frll f,{r !tr jti.ul;i ,;r"; ;;,,rlil )-r,;:r.r.r iriii.t,.l (,fi :t.ir ,:t:!_ircil ,,, ,'j ,jll('l i,:'i,iiL) !ii)i.fr.jii,rt.,,,,,,,t_ii:r:,.tr.i,l:i,rl,,,,,ritr.r),,r."'1,;;lir;il:rrrNll,'i;;,r,il;,,r,:it,',,r,, -"'

l,':::l ri\ii-:i .,f:ttr:rri;:r'1:ii'r;r, fl'l.i.r:'r.r/i1'',1y1.

:']'r-r r.'i.i r',,i r.ir,-ii rr.; , i,ilir) ui.,ir,""',ir.i,rrj, ) 1i).rl ir,!.,.. 1r1:rir..it).,.,0, iiTrrl l,,ria:.i,. '..,,i:'rrr,,,"l.,,..i.ct .i.r-oi,r, i,j.it; l\1., i; l;r1 i.,-,,,.,, !:jJ1il i.rl_,:r:,i r'1r r.11,,.r;'91111i,,, ,.r,"r1, i1.,,..!iiilr,Lt:i:r j,i ij,.i,\ irrrLrri r:ji.1-.i.r.l \ii.r:,u.,r.',',,"t:f,,;i";l:],,;i;,',,:;.;ii:;;,,;,rr,,

at-r11 !91'11'g1,1,,i, ii)t.i ir), iilr.s t)tesrllr (io (jtair,, S(rll and Lor,vey u;tr,o ilrc saril

(u

TO lL{y1i /\NlJ,l..O }l{jL,ll ihc a0o\,(r di,scribed pien)jsejj, tolielhei ,,rrlh all and .rrr;ular, eppiiilcir'nics ,,hetcLo 1i:

ue iignts an\,,,visl 1,elor,gi'g uitro Li:c sa.tcl .;.u(: il; ,lr,i,,.. l,; ilil r I'il,s

iLCir's liitr.l asslgn.s tore,rel i iltd .,ri; rio )ter'qli' irinrj rJ il:" 1 Cir j.r,,e l.

, ,r ul t.l beils, c;rccuirls anii airir,rini:,lia.rorr;, io \'\iiil'faili :irrcl ,i'or.uvr:r lJefrtnd ail aird siogula, th: ;aid pr€llitses ilnto tjr€ r,arcr Jeit'lll .J rli:Sl;i-, lr,i.t,

llclfS aoal a55jgi:, agalt!st .r/a.i.1/ ,!isirl ,,'hl.llsocvai l.v,,iull.i r Lainliug, oi io clerjiti l[e sanre, 0r auy pan l-ireiei,F,

wlin.rs-q (j [l ji, itirIc. I .li r),.rj tii:i i, tirr :j tiris lJ.1 i;ir cal, ci

'V::.r:,,'"s, 1., , J..tlt(:-r0; .;; ..rt:

.l \r., r /"/' / / WJ/!../ l :, /:,, ll : it' r.' : ::.t,,1,, r.!..e. 2.(, a:i:l !!.! .,./ (:,:'::1,./2,:^:l).:., . .. .

r vrr\ r. /\ur\r\ () \Y1, irl) Gillllill

'BoIr0l{}r i[I!, lhe unr)rrsi!ned, .,. lioiiliy pu]rlic i;r au(j i(rl,:iaj(J c0unby drl(l \'\/urrLv anri sta.Le.

blale, on i)ris ,r..,,,".,,^..^,r..

trl,i" rlay pelsonally eppear,erl t , t. \, vo .',U ilr.rl lillotln to riie'uc l;e illc a.nd illii t,;, gi\ 1,,1o lltlr't',.; ra,iss rrc sLrlscril;eri r.r uLe ioicg0irg i'sit,rrne .1,heyeac)rexecuLci]|]tesaltir:ior'|iielrx|iroseSu'.c,,on,i.l.,io,i.;,;"':''":::::]nS||.!]]]1e])r,lltti:lll]rnoir'}ec]ge "?rriirie ' his rvjfc' bo;h t;':0"; rt rhc sairi ilaviitg irec, oxariri.cd by r{i,i..,J, rLir.jri. i ,,r,irc ri, rhc ,n,;''o" i,"rlil1lli.;

rne pl'ii'iry aricl air:r.i fl0lr jard ir(rf Lir;Jrarirl, arrr iraviirEl Lie " Lhe sr! nc iullt r:t;l;,ined to )rc,r, sr!nc ,,tit.,, t. ,, llri r-]i,, . -.- :"':"'.'""'tt she , lhc r',rra';'., 1rr'': ";'1,i,,'j;t,,ili'.,, '"'''

,r,,ish ,uo r,ri;.,aci ,1'. sa:.nc ior ,- ,,,,,,,,,,,i-]'lllr':f:i1;;;ll:;i''

._-e r.e.!/w,vLr 4,ru lerr,rocLaL)0i-r " "'hrr acianclcreeri, lli;rcjn expr.esserl, anci she ri, anr.l lhat she dicl no.c

I i \i) Surll., 0J,, 0lri,,lCl! this itr0 it. ., -':: dr,y oi lYlir\;y'

a, l. rg{;0

l[']liii S'.i,'ri'1., I c0uNJ.Y oir.. ..iilil.lt Il.r;I ORE i\{Ei .i....:t., ,i.rr. L........

.i.1' i:.,.t' .) |.-: .

.1,

ll[]Oi{Lt iiiti,

lusDatrrj, atiti lu,i,ilg t.:.c :ri;r iLrlty i::p)aurerl

ncl([or/]rdged suclt jnstruiltcIt 1.0 ijc Lr]"

rolsLderaijoI tbrrch r:pr*sei, a,ru til,i CIt/iJN UN.uti { ir4V t:i,tiri)

;|\L ii ri.l

,r.n(i lile rairi Cou;rt1,, al ofiiccs in Sar: Aug as Ljne t l)re da.y anr) ;,e ar ,/.., .,..

(_ ,."/:trt:. .,,..:/,1 ,/ .,, ti ci)ti il ,/ ., .,/._.

f-lcrli (tollr,, Cou, ,, So.,: r!d:*,, ,1,1,,._rdinri, texrs

; i:li :i1 E"': ii* t\ i i\\

l

''{ jl irl lt:

: i'l E i'(:' \'.. j ,\. r$ '

r"l i'.'-

; iiti lli li. rr1..

li.

, f. =a,-j !r:EllR, 'z :te 9. tt;a t.

3. I ll\ til f ].1 .r.ii 'i ti 'il'. i" I' l.i\\ ' ir

I 3 i:'ii; *!r

r

i:l1i:

lll il'.' i. ''1, i() .

)i' li :]'".

t,?j= I il ii

I

tl '1..,i11" rj'.

:'it-"

H

o c

t

'd .)'

" ;:li:

lJ

i

r: l. '. [il ]l l,,' n ;{ :,'.lJ o

i ir ".tr I ,-j'

'lli '

ji' f:\ t.. uil. ;l' lr t l;-jri

"i- i :ir, ;,,

l

ii ,i

i

'::

ii o 2)'

ii ri..

tij_ gi\.

i'r I :

?

I

t,,\ l\. ,-..:,7

ir i;il ;\.1 | p

I

i;

'i ll

ils Vl t.."'J l:i il ,1'\

o

:J l'

',,1.;,..:',

I

,'l 't t,

NO cv -12"9344

CHARLES and MARY LOU AI.F-ORD.

S\ IN THE DISTzuCT COURT rll| Plaintiffs il ,1, ;h' l

''"1,i | "ll''', ti;i {ii)l(' ul - l'r VS. ,

t

.ll rAi\r :;

i).t.,,, i.iil,/.:r, ll :ir | { )l : lJlsiit:t (iltrrii OF ROBERT THOMAS Mcr(EIT'HEN. iiAt\l ill l{}tWlFli;, I f:XAli | ,.r., (;I i,f EOG RESOURCES. ItVC., arrd CENTRAL TEXAS LAND SERVICES.

Defendants SAI\ AUGUSTII\E COLNTY, ]']]XAS

PLAINTIIIFS'MOT

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COUR]':

Now COME', CHARLES and MARY LoU ALFoRD, hereinafterreferred to as,,plaintiffs,,,

atrd move the courl for a summary juclgment declaring the ownership rightr; of the parties to oi1. gas,

and other minerals in and under those tracts of land clescribed in a Wananty Deeri dated April 25"

2003' by Jack Jessup and his ivife. Annie Elizabeth Jessup, to Charles arrcl Mary Lou z\lford. 1r

suppoft of their motion Plaintif]'s show as follorvs:

1.

MOTION UNDER fRCp 166a

This is a "conventional" motion for summar,vi udgment under Rule 166a of the Tnxns Rut_ps

oF clvll- PnoceouRE. Plaintiffs contencl tliat there is no issue of material fact necessary to be

determined in order to decide this motion. The motion is based on interpretation of the deed which

is central to this suit and can be clecided as a matter.f'raw.

Page 1

Alford v Nlcl(eithen. ct al MSJ

s uMMARv ;uoci^airNT EViDEN cE

As summary judgment evidence to support their motion Plaintifi-s provide the fbllowing:

1. The warrantt' Deed in question. execlited by Jack Jessup and his wife" A*ie Elizabeth Jessttp, conveying tlx'ee tracts of real property iocated in San Augustine

County, Texas. That deed is dated April 25" 2003,and it is filed for record in vol' 38, Page 298. of the official Public Recorcls of San Augustine county, Texas.

A true and co.rect copy is marked as Exhibit A and atteLchr:d hereto.

2, The deposition testimony of Ken Muckeirol,, the attorney who prepared the deed.

His testimony is founcl on pages ?-2-28 of his deposition.

nrarked as Exhibit B. and

a copy of those pages is attachecl.

3. The deposition testimony of connie vaughn, the legai assistant who assisted in

preparation of the deed ancl attached the properly description. pages 19-26 of her

testimony are marked as Exhibit C ancl attachecl.

3. FACTS

Jack and Annie Jessup agreed to seli three tracts of land plaintiff's. They rvent to the to office of l(en Muckeiroy in San Augustine" where he of1-rces;and operates San Augustine county Abstract

company' The parlies told the employees at the officr: u&at they wanted dc,ne, and docunrents were prepared. One of those documents ll,as a Warranty l)eecl.

That deed contained pro'isions which are the core of this case.

First, the deed containecl a section regarding "Reservations and Exceptions,,which reacl as

Page 2 Alfbrd v McKeithen, et al MSJ follows:

Reservations rrom conve'ance arLcr warranty: For cilantor, a reservation of'the ftlll possession. benefit, and use of T'ract 'fwo for the remainder of the life of Grantor, a life esrare.

's Exceptions to conveyance and warranty: Easements, rights-of-way and presuiptive riglits" whether of record of (sic)

not; Jl prese'tly recorded restrictions, reservatiorls, covenants, conclitionr, a,il ancl gas leases, mineral severances and other instruments, oLher tharr liens and conveyances. that affect the property

A11 the pa|ties initialed this section to indicate their understanding and agreeme't. No reservation

of minerals by the grantors is mentionecl in the deed itserl.

Second, the deed made relbrence to an attached exhibit.

The deed stated the purpose of that

attachment as follows:

, . . and being more particularly described b.v metes and bouncls on Exhibit "A" attaohed hereto.

Unforlunately' the legal assistant who helped p1'epa1'e the deed copi,:d a properly description

from an earlier conveyance that contained not only a metes and bounds description of the properly

but a mineral reservation lronl that prior conveyance (Muckelroy depositi,:n, pages 22-2g:connie

Vaughn deposition. pages 19-26), This lawsuit is the, result of her error in faiiing to read the entire

description that she copied before attaching it as an erxhibit to the deed.

4.

RULtrS OF CONS'fI{LJCI-ION F'OR D]]EDS

Generally the same rules of coustruction are applicable to deeds as 1o contracts. The goal of the court should be to give effect to the intention of the parties as expr:esr;ed in the language they

used' In the absence of some conflict in the language used the court is limited to consideri's what

Page 3 Alfold v McKeithen. ct ai MSJ is found in the "four corners" of the docr-une nt.

Lucrrel v. white, gr 9 s.\^/.2d 45g. 46r_462 (Tex.

1991); Coghill v' Grffith,358 s'w.3d 834 (Tex.App.-Tyler, 2012,pet"den.), In the case before the

court there is no need to iook outsicle the "four 0ol'ners" to asceftain the intent of'the parlies,

The courl must consider whether an ambiguity exists. If there is no ambiguity, then the court

cannot consider extrinsic evidence. Cherokee .[4/ater Co. v. F'reeman 33 s.w.3d 34g, 354 (Tex'App'-Texarkana 2000, pet.den.). Neither palty has pled arnbiguity and in this case there is no ambiguity' The parties clearlv expressed their intent in rhe cleed itself. Given the opporlunity to list in the deed any reservations or exceptions they intended, ilre parties iniiialed a provision which

reserves a iife estate to the Jessups in one of the tracts but reserves no minerals.

There is no conflict between the provisions of the deed itself and the attachecl exhibit, The

deed provides for no reservation of minerals and then states that the attachment is attached for

a

limited pulpose. i.e. to provide a metes ancl bounds description of tht: tracts conveyeci. The attachment is not incorporateclby reference for anv other purpose.

]lhus therre is no conflir:t between

the terms of the deed itself ancl the attached exhibit.

Since the answer in this case is found in the deed itsell.

not in any extrinsic or parol evidence,

this case is well-suited for a ruling by the court as a matter of 1aw. In fact" it is effor. if the deed is

not ambiguous, for the trial court to take evidence and submit the interpretation of the deerl to a jury,

Ensearch Exploration, Inc. v. wintmer.718 s.w.2d 308. 310 (Tex.App.-Amari11o i9g6, writ. ref d

n'r'e'); Prairie Producing Co. v Schlctchter,'/86 S.w"2ct 40g,413 (l'ex.App.-Texarkana 1990. writ

denied),

Page 4 Alfbrd v Mcl{eithen. et al MSJ

THE eUEST'roN: DOES THE REFI,RENCE To rHE priopER.ry DESCRIPTION FOR ME'IES AND BOUNDS DESCzuPTION AI,SO INCoRpoRATIi THE RESERVATIO}{ oF MINERALS L:\NGIJAGE?

There is no reservation of minerals provision in tlie deed the.ressups signeci. So ttre question

is the effect of the attached exhibit. The answer is found in the dee<i itself, 1br the cleed itselIshows the purpose for the attached exhibit was not to adcl additional terms or pi:ovisio's to the cleed but only to provide a metes and !pu!!i! property de_seftpliqn

ARGTJMENT AND AU'|FIORIOiIES: AN ATTACHMI,NT TO A CONTRACT OR DEED IS ONLY E]TFECTIVE FOR ]-Hi]

PURPOSE STATED BY TFIE MAIGR OF THE CONTRACT

The seminal case on the question presentecl by this motion rs Gtterin,i Stone L)o. v, p.J. Carlin

Consrrucrion ()o',240 u.s. 264,36 s.ct. 300; 60 L.Ed. 636 (i916). Gueriniwas a consrruction contract case' It is common iu construction contlzLcts to refer to other clocuments that contain

constructions standards" to incorporate other agreements or provisions, to irLcorporate sub-co11tracts,

etc' In that case the contract in question was a contract ior the construclion of'a post office and court building in Puet'to Rico. fhe parties argued over the ef fect o1' a refr:rence to a sub-contract.

The court held that under the greater weight of authoritl, and based on ,,s0Ltnd reason,, t6at ,,in the

case of sub-contracts, as in other cases o1' explesr; agreements in writing. a ref'erence by the contracting parlies to an extraneous wliting for a particular pulpose makes rit parl of their agreement

only for the purpose specified."

williston on contracts; $ 30:25 (4" Ed.1 ibllor,r s the same rule as originally pronounced b_v

Guerini.

Page 5 Alford v iVlcKeithen. er al MS.]

A number of federal courts, inclucling the lriflh circuit and fexas District courts, have applied this rule' ru Hitt & Combs v, First llational Ilanlc of Sun Angelo, Tex,. 139 F.2ri 740 (5rh Cir.

1944)'the cout1, citing Guerini"held that referring in a contract to pians or specilications only made

them effective to the extent they referrecl to them, and "if the agreement contains quallfying words, they will be gi'en effect, and the ref'erence rimited aeeordingly,,,

InRalston Purina Co. v. Barge Juneau artct Gutf'(,'aribbean Marin<t Lines,619 F.2d 374 6,h cir' 1980), one of the parties argued that a ref-erence in the bill of lading 1o the caniage of Goods

by Sea Act (CoGSA) incoryorated that act for all Jrurposes. The court heicl the argurnent to be

inconsistent with the "wel1 established and Lrnclisputed principle oIcontra<:t 1aw that areference by

the contracting parties to an extraneous writing for: a particular purlrose makes it parl of their

agreement only for the purpose specified," citing Gtrcrini. rn2004the court again considered a case

involving COGSA in Foster lnheeler Energy oorporation v, Alt xting,Iiang MV, -\g3 F.3d 349 (5,h

Cir, 2004), and cited again the rule fl.om llal,ston purino.

Most recently, in James rlt/brc) et ctl. v, I(uhlntun Electric ancJ Kuhlman Corporation. Case

No' 11 -60728 (United States Court of Appeals fbr the F-ilth Circuit)" opilio' filed May 24"2013,the couft cited Fos'ter I4/heeler ancl quoted its holding verbatim.

Texas state courts have also adoptecl thi: rule set out trt Gtterini. rn Sullivctn v. City o.f Galveston^ 17 S.W.2d 478 (Tex.App. 1928, a1f. .]4 S.\\'.2d g0B, Tex.comm.App. 193 1), the courl considered the effect of a bond that was referred to in an agreement or provision that made a bank

the depository of furrds of the city of Galveston. T'he Jrarties argued over thr: effect of the trrrovisions

of the bond' The cout't" citing Guerini^ held that ''the attachecl paper had no effect upon the

Page 6 Alford v McKeithen, et al MSJ obligation of the parties expressed in the bond itself.

other than to supply the evidence of the rate of interest . . ."

The court of Appeals in Trico Mctrine services et al v. Sreu,an & Slet,enson Technical services et' al',73 s'w.3d 545 ('fex.App.-Houston l1"l 200'2,no rvrit hist.), the court cjistinguished

between a mere reference to another clocumr:nt ancl cai;es urvolving attachments which are incorporated by ref-erence "for all pr-uposes." pointing out that the extraneous document or attachment applies only as the terms of referencr: inclicate it should be incorporated.

rnTribble & Stephens Co. v. RGM oonstrucror,s', L.P,, 154 s.w,3 d,63g(T'ex.App.-l{our;ton

114'I\ 2004' pet.derL.), the court expressiy referred to the Guerini rule, hclding that when a prime

contract is referred to in a sutrcontract is it incorporated "only ibr.the purtr)ose specified.,'

once this rule for construction and interpretation of contracts ancl cleecls is applied to this case

the resuit becomes clear. 'fhe attachecl property description, copied from an older cleed, is completely ineffective in resen'ing any lights in the rninerals in the tracts rlescribed because it was

not attached for the plllpose of providing a substantive provision of the agr.eement of the patties. It

u'as attached for a limited. specified pulpose, ancl any language other than that which is trart of the "metes and bounds" description is surplusage a'cl must be drsreqarded,

7.

C]ONCLUSION

Summary Jr"rdgrnent is proper iri this case fbr the foliowrng reasonrj:

I' The intent of the parties is clear from tire terms of the deecl itself. i.e. their i'tended no reservation of minerals:

Page 7 Alfold v McKeithen. et al MSJ 2' The deed is not ambiguous; therefore, no extrinsic or parol evidence should be

considered in construing it.

3' The attached exhibit rvas pro'ided fbr a sole purpose.

i.e. to provide a metes and bounds description;

4' The language in the metes and bounds description that rcfers ro a r.eservation of minerals is not effective to resetve minerais, because the parlies did not rntencl to incorporate the

attachment for that purpose;

5' The court has the authority to consl:ue the deecl and to clisregarrl the erxtraneous language in the attachment to the deed:

6' When the courl constrttes the cleed ancl disregards the exlraneous language in the

attachment to the deed as having no effect, there is no mineral reservatiorL b1, the Jessups;

7 ' In the absenct: of a mineral reservalion b.v the .Tessups. ;rl1 their right. title, and ownership interest(r;) in the minerals in the tracts conveyecl r,,,,ere transfbrrr:d to plaintilfs under the

deed;

8' fhe court has authority to construe the deed. interyret its effr:ct, and declare the rights

of the parties under that deed:

9 ' The court should grant a summary j uclgn-rent that declares thaLt piaintiff's own and hold

all minerals in the tracts convel,ed to them by the Jes;sups that the ;essups owned.

WHEREFORE, Plaintilfs request that the Court set a hearing on their Motion fbr Summary

Judgment with notice to all parties and that upon hr:aring rhe court grant their motion and enter

judgment that Plaintifls own and hold all thi: interest of Jack p. ancl Arrnie: Elizabeth.lessup in the

Page 8 Alfbrd v McKeithen. et al MSJ tracts of land described in the warranty Deecl by Jach P. ancl Annie Eliz;abeth Jessup to plaintiffs

dated Aprii 25.2003,and filed tbr record in vo1. 38" Page 298 of the o1.ficial public Records of San Augustine County, Texas; Plaintilfs further request r.hat they fecovel.ali costs and all other relief to

which they may be entitled.

Respecr I uliy submirted,

;;' t 7i:''-rl---

t;*-* ^'"-t!i"' " State Bar. No. 1723g000 210 Norrh Street Nacogdoches. Tl{ 75961 (e36) 559_11ti8 F'AX (936) 559_0099 ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF,S

EERIITrcAI! IJSERVICE er copy of the foregoing document has Icefijl'that been served on opposing cgunsel this ,' )i ' day ,,.!t,t of September, 201 3, by certified mail/retum receipt requested, to-l'it:

Mr. Jason R. Mills CM/RRR #i010 2i80 0001.Z 4234 6Bi3 Mr. Gr.aham l(.. Sinrrns Mr, Jeff I(. Heclr Freeman Mills pC 110 N. College. Suite 1400 Tyler, TX'15702

Mr. Noel D. Cooper cM/Rl{R *1010 27800002. ,1234 6880 Law Offices of Noel D. Cooper 1 17 Nor"rh Streer. Suite 2 Nacogdoches, TX 7 5961

Page 9 Alford v Mcl(eithen. cr al MSJ

Mr. Bill McWhorter CM/RRR #7010 2780 0002 4234 6891 Bill McWhofier & Associates 119 North Street, Suite A Nacogdoches. TX 7 5961-5200

',1

:l ,ilt / i,-

l'om Roiiie -

Pagc 1i) Allbrd r.' Mci(eirhen. et al MSJ

'7('/' ?':z , : i,;;r.jn;f i;#_n .,,,;lriirs 1'^-^,i"1', lc r;1-

r7' '

3i| t,; {J}li,? 1'J %,*ii.o,, WA&!+'iqv-1l-Etlll_ryq{_y{j-t@.1.l5i.,qtr,).! ,, Lit) :, +1,01,/flA,4 _ ._ Dt.,tr.,l

Dntei Aprrl 2,J, 2003

(;rsDfori,lAgl( p, JESSU? Al'lD wa-E'

ANNTLi nl'll'lBt')11'1 Jiissi.lp {;f antor)6 vrallrng AtJtlrelo N0llnly)r ltorrl:3, Bcrx 481i, ,!i,t Augriririne, sau *F^nteci ei-rARLEs Au etstiinc eo*q'

o*,r,t"t*'unttt* \'evs75e7')

6ronke,, Mnrrn* Aeitrr*a;ffil,TJl';;,.:t:;,,''ttrt 4,",,,,.t)\ r\\).r(j ,, iJcxJ2!), Srn eonulderationl Arriluftt(), Silri Aug:lLstuo Corug T.exas 159?,;

$';fffffili'il;t-,,t}:,if,.,l,r,r,,i,ii'urffi1Jiili?,;,ff;i::,ff;,nturl vrrrLobrc coruirrriarior,r !o clmroi paicl, crsi l?l"lt nt: of n,u rl,,re rb.r r.

fr'ff'd;?"fl;l;H#;i'"j;xtr;::trJ{'ff,,'ilffii';li,;lii;::JTi[i'f:,::1f ,ii lfrT,:;:i,,iL,,i*,HL**,,, , i I fJ s ry Er p j, rj {{ffi fFrir,rB,l, I v e !d cB rj) 1

Iflf#li'.rii*lihl1 I ;t;;J;;..:r:t,i;

;xljtp::ljt"*J1,, j:il,);:i;,:,1;,,tJ;ltillix,1r:r,r:::

r

i.Utj,'d##"*,$;,:ili, ;;;:ll:11,i:;;ii :.1'',.1:; ThiJ;:li*n1,il.:

?l,Jji,,";it1;;:i, TT{-ACT T,l#tlr EEn'lO 2 Bcre s, nro?rl r\p d.r -

Ff l,.##',i;,,*r$;: ;

T'ItAeT F!*R&ttr ;, .1, ,l: i nfi::fil::ili,'ll;,i*;l;.l;:,,;,n,o,j;J;i:lli,,,l ii ":

; il,ii' fi ;ll;,i ]r "iljilir ;,tr ];,,r i ;

ft ,;,,;f.;,0.,1;:

i::;;:., o,,,.n"jiii,l.iJl,; *ll

[:ili:b'fr?81,,,?:lfi,]ijtifl*$:ff*fil*i:lktffi;r*rr;*:ffrr*,r,i:,,",i:,,,,;T,r,i.;::i!1!i f:lIlll;l;jill"Tl;::l::i:.1,;::,4il1; ,,, etj!rle i,.,,Dr.*ni,u ,;,,j,;,,: i.L (/ i':' r'* rlf bencr, -r'! .y,p..o1 r rt-//'

Fff:HiJ';[-:illl;'";',u r, ,' rh- . ilJffiryffiru,Ti ffi:Jl:'1fiff1',fuj'ii;..1i$l;,.;:,:i,;il* ll1illx,;,1,:if;i:,iy,.',,1,i**,r*,n,;;;,ff;::l

'ffgl*'t,#;',ij^'*"J't:i;1"*:lir"ii;' ,il.;-i.,1i,i.,1:,-.'1i,,,,Ji,,,,;i,1,"',1;ll,l,i.Jf ,,j:,i,;:ll,

#frfltT#t'Hxii $it ;i:'.,;.;'; ;i l :**i::;rri;i;iii ;i";.Ti::i,',1"-1",,i ;

r-l:;"ll:, ;;,rj,, T,H;.?l;;

;Ttr;il:*.:lg,tfr. n'

;

,',ll;: ,:l::l;,:lll',:i;:,ii,ii:;;f?,t*i.^,:iJ;;:

,j fftffi::i;'l:i:lltffUi:ltTlii &e !'1r1i',{,d rLDrii 1,::,::,:f,:lj!{i'iv lrofc (rescriD,,d Ls rLrily pnid acco'crurg til\o tue oiltext ::equrrrs, 'Bci, ro

" " ,",o*"uu,{

e

ni!1g-,rjru liorril noilil, rud r\nd })tcuo'.rrj jrelu(]. ule :ucuortrr jr.relu(jr) pll{rri, t):e plruni, n " , W*#,# -- r-1-,'1F...:1r.t,-.. : : \ {J:,+ipi# r:i.,1=6;'&.ta

I

PLAINTTFFS' EXHIBI'I'A

'|ii;,

,'-ii#fi;r|ff'ill*iil;iill'|'i.!:ii;:i,ili;:.iIiHil.ii|;;i|;;ifri $ffi#ffi.!i,$i#il#:'ih,r,',,:'l, iir,',..r'iiii,tfj' ;:,;i;ill,iio,, ",,, J

iffi* $lr "i5;;j;i:;*il;tifi ,..l;fil fusFi'.,:":::

;iffi#*i;ri;llffififi=,,;1, ., i; i;i*i, i' |||lff$i{*:,, "-=':t'r1 a;^-- :.-, .l . "t,.tl+rr_ !p; i '- i th*, *un,out,, ,r_.r, tot o!' Irilrcor of u'' *u c. :r&rb o, rr, l'qt'i4r il i,;:a.';c;rl ir -t' r.rr i;1,1 ",,u,,,,tttot e.r:.i i tu"t n ' t,';", 11 "a t"\'t' Io;c rexgs. sal uuru"

eeanB ..1 '", i ' )')o'\)1:

," ., "- ii, ritr'l.el: .-,;'

, l,,erri ;,eti r ' lurns outjl - l'i oc '- uou'o oi bhc .r c1;.

sij. irtrr,r+ 'irlr".srr op.l iiire i;cr,n ""ul l,1 ,,, i.itect do,.J of s.,, ,.

Ssl uoou ""'''.-1-'"q Ard 1r.r.t0, ri) .lr: air rJr., {i,,al'rn,.ir"""r.r.,,",."r,,^:::t"t''tt, ii r.e,;

:::*-trt*up ?. \/, )Jiorr.-r..; ,.,o"tt'tottt r.iis ,, i', iiL1y8 ott"'' I!'11'i1e'.. ar' r'csn.

exec,rir0ci );ili ,'

Reeord€ orB&rr ':"-"t ier iaud ,,;;r;i.' -: rc.rrtvi )1^ 'lc:{aa1 1 :!,{ior)rc.,, '\rrl'u::e 921 1:" !!9 '' '11

*.r ;;;;r;ffil: i lclrrf'l ir'e,',;,.,.n t:

c-l,.,q ittle''r;''

t...ii Ii t'ato i 'n lt'rietr' iur'i ..!g ire.i.g6;;:t:,,l BrBrr{NjFo *r, B'B'.{N:FG -,... 'I/c.' nE e .\(i1-

aij s :)DJ.D.I r r. +r - "-_-

t"

"';;;;: =.'';"'"';;'

171; +c'::e ' r; 2r1 i/:r ':n'' rarr;' Qr;q -.ilr'i,,":;: ' ''i:' 'r(er isoq i;r:

.(1!:o('1 *,":.v ?Hr",,ci ar :r1..h1, ;;;;;,r";,";::;.,;,':;:, ;11,::'tt ''5{iid '',,,; ;.."r,;;

i;., ':!tli (*!;;rcx-:4,rr;41y ij , r lcc igli ?FEN'!) !{;e.rn (i,6 '

a4 ..';:t::.

"'/1 t"j('t)):'' a,,nt't''

' ' ) i)90 )'i2 !1i)'n j \t llr€EiccE 11, :,:.iriri 'it:el Fa:c'Ji'.:!t:t. tt:.,1r. i!,(. ,rr...

..,rr..a* 'l:,;i"ir,,ri, corliaiDl.ErJ ?

ac:.es ,,"r:j-::tr;^o'"'",,rrtrrr',,,".0 ;-; lru"'r'rirT;:r:;:.;:";;^,

tlXi"li.Bt'i' , h,,

*-::_::_:= -

Ill_srArE e oi,hrty or ri,,xu" "

rt:, saN..r*udusl,,iq,,

.:r -l r::lYal a

CHARLES AND MARY LOU ALFORD vs ROBERT IHOIMAS McKEII-HEN Ken lMuckelroy on O1/30/20.13 Paoe *Y- 1 '

1 CAUSE hTo" cv-12 -93411 z CHARLES AI{D MARV AT,FADN LOU' ]N THE D]:SI'RICT COURT

!tlaintif f s, A

vD.

oF ROBERT THOMAS McI(ETTHEN, Eioc RESOURCES, J:NC. , j\$m CENTRAL TEXAS TAATD "1 SERVTCES

Def end,ant,s. SAN AUGUSITTNE COTINTY, TEXAS

J.U

11 ORAI, DEPOS:TTTON L4 KENi MUCKELROY

JA}RJA,RV 30, 2O:13 1A !=

ORAL DEPOS:ETTON OF KEI.T MJCKEIROY, pr,cduced as il th wiLness aE Ehe irrsBanee of the plaj-ntiffs and dul.y 1.7 s'worn, was t'aken in. the above-st,yIed and -nu.:nbered. cause o;nJAlilJARY 30, 2013, fro:n 2:05 p"m" t,o 3:1.0 p.m., before Amber Hogue, Cerbified SLrortshand ReporEe:r in and f<>r t,he 4V of Texas, reporeed by compuberized stenoc,l1)e SeaCe 2t machine at' t,he offiees of ,T. Ken Murckelrr>y, 10g F,osrt,er zz SE,'eet,, Cenger, Texas 75935, pursuan., t,o Lhe Texas R,uIes ZJ of Civi.L Procedure and the provisi.ns st,*t,ed. on t.her z+ record o:r attached heret,o. z3

( tS Gretchen ShoreCourt Reporting \vuo, 7, r58-2'183 * Fax: (903) 758-4890 '' ww:w.gretchenshore.c;onr ph, r,,. /on2\

PLAINTIFFS' EXHII]IT B

R5iil::ftf$%ytruriir! ALFORD vs ROBE:R l r Hotu1A5 McKE:r-r-H'N F,age> 2.2

a" Do yor: recal.L e:f your c)wn memory €rrry dise,ussion 2 with any of tirese perople you ba,.l,;ed 1:o a,bout: t:I:is 3 transaet;ion :i:egilrd.i*g, anyth,ing. havlne Ler do wi.bh 4 nrineral s ? 5 A" i\o" 5 (l:ixhi bi t il rnarle ed ")

7 p. I\Tow, "tet rnc ..iherw you whagrs lreen nrarkeel as B Fixhibie Nei" ;2, whieli i.'i 6r werrr*rit;y deeet lui,eh v,enclor,s 9 lien "

10 ,i\nel o.o .yout icle:ri:if:y wha.': Ir:n showing yor:

11" here as ExhibiB IVo" Z?

L2 A" yes, .[L's i* derec] i-hat we prerpa:reel" 13 0' Ar.r x'i"g}:L. ?\n.{ :tt app€rars ber ,krave been signed 14 by Lhe J'essupsi, cor.r,cct;,i 15 A, yei;" L6 0, And f.:: i;hc: lad.ies a*ci ge:rLIe:nen of tire jr.l.ry L7 who may :RoE u,rr.de:::sLaneJ ex:ar:t,J.y a,l1 L,he proeedure ir: reerl 1B esbate t,ransaterti.o*s i the Af 1c;i:ctsr R.trrles ar.e noE shown ern 19 that doetuneRl:, elor::ee L? 20 A" OEher than bh.ls gz,ant,ee,s crt_ t,her top" 2L 0. A1:L rj.g+ht-" A::<j, Lhey el:Lc{ not sig:: bh,c €l.oeunrent, 22 eorreel? 23 A" No. Tlhey only irrj.tialecl thc reservaE,ions 24 seet,ion "

25 O" A1"t rjghb" A,rrd j.s t,krere agarn, e:<p1aj-n t,o

{ TE Gretcfren llhore Court Reporlirrg ,'l Ph: (903)7sB-2 r83 * Fax: . ww"w,gr<;tchenshore.r;om loos; 7s-a+oiro

CHARLEI] AND MAIRY .tO! ALFOIlD VS ROBERT THOIV'AS MCKEIT ItEl\ Ken i\4uciretroy on 01/30/2013 page 23 1 Lhr:iladj.es and genLLerilcn oft flhe jury Ehe purpose of t:he 2 sir:;nabures" Is it clustornarry for th.e g:rarrtee i* a rreal 3 esUabe t:r'a: saeLion t;o al.scl r;l.gn Lhe decdi, 4 a" :ttrs not eusLomary" 5 p" rrTow, L'he srl-g'nai-ures a::'e gho.wrr erf bh.e Jessr:trrs 6 ancl t,her:e ;li:e also siome inj,L j,a,ts, eorr€)et,./ 7 A" y.es" B p" itnd urhei:e ar.e tr:e i.nitiats shou,n rn iixhrb;tt:

9 No" 2? 10 A" lSesid.e Lhe r.ese:lvatir:ns from eon,ueyane e ar ei 11 warranEy seeElon erf Ehe cleect "

L2 O" i\I1 z,j.ghL. ,:le.l..L Lrs yous: underrsbanding, &rs EtR :-3 at't:orney p:r:aetic:i*g in Err<: errea of real esEat,e raw, vrhat L4 is meant, lotr Lha L l.e:rnr rrre$er,va j:iorrs . il What,rs the 15 eonlplet,er tel::mino,logv t,krere:i, A" l{eser.,vatior:s f"rclm eonv,eya)ile e and warr".anEy , 17 a" Oleay, .tlnrJ wl:a.t deres thcrb terniinology ra:f l:i: bo?

IX A" r't ref er-'s t,o aR1' - - any x'eser,vation erf i.n1:elrest 19 t.hats tlre g::ant,o:r inr,ends t:o ma.lce as to Ltre traerts 20 eonveycd i'Bhab erecrd-" Ttrat's wherre -* where i.b sih'tird. 2L app,gsu' in, t:he d,octlunernL.

1Z A" ISased o* youir usrua,l, aRe[ eus,t,omary pra,cti.et: a.t 23 Eher bime this doeusnenL wasi prepat.crd., Lf ehe 'parbies irad 24 insLrueted you in_ ar:ry way t.hab tf]€r grantors, the clel:sups, 25 were resenri:1g rnirrey,als or. a.rly paz.b bhere,:f wouleL "

l:haL

fr tT( Gretchen Shore Courl Reporling Ph: (903) 758-2'183i * Fi;rx: tgOgl iSS:4b90 ;- wdw.gretchensnore.conl

P|f il: 5-t"f$t"y6fllri3Ji A L F o R D vs Ro Er r: rt r I H o rilAr3 M c i( E r-

r r-r EN

F>ag<> 24 r navc beon not:eci in t:hat cleeell 4\

2 g " yeri, ,un Eiraf. Eect,ion.

3 p" Anet w*aE,s; b]:.e purpos€l of hervi,ng lhe: par*ies 4 inibial in therE seclion? 5 a" we erlways war:t bor-h par:ties bo be aware o,i: wha.

5 is belncJ rcset:rved" An(l sict whoev,et:l :* vlhoevetr has t,l:em 7 sign up or si,gn the ciocrurren' is Laugirtr bo go t;hrough b.har:

B and expl'ain t:er t1:,em therE yourri,s reservi.ng wlrat,ever,s 9 noEed herrc a:nc1 (:oRveiyirrg arly obhcrr :irrt,ex,est, t]:,at vou 10 might ,have irr the px,opetrt:ies:" 11 A" Okay " lvow, there is a?,e ar: heei bo FixhibiE AIo z "

Lz a page elr mor('er t:han oner 1.rage Lrrat a])pears t. iravc some 13 deseription " r*etes a*d bound-rs descri.ptions '= of somc:

L4 properby" 15 l{" Xeij. ae th a" A1:t ri"ght" r, ca.L.l yor.r:r'al:tenLron f irr;t of: al.l L7 hn bhe d,eseriSrtj.on that-,'s: err,r tire Lop of .Lhe seeond page 18 the d.eed u,rrde:r, Traet, I "

19 A, yes "

20 A, Do y.ou lenow t.he sou::ere of Lh.a b elescription Lhat:

2L is abtaehed Lo t;his deed, )lxthibiE IVel " 2? aJz A, yes" lltrs a rL-,rs a deetcl fronr .]"g50 w]:ere bhel 23 ,Jessups reeeivecl t,ha i t,:rae t "

zE! (Exhlbit 3 rnarke,d") /,3 0, Atl ri,ghb " !,et rne show yc:u what's br3en marlced ;I \f Ph: (903)

Gretchen ljhc;rre eourt lReportirrg u Fax:

758-2183 tgosl Ts8r.b9o'-T *^v*.gr.erchenshore.com

CHARLES AND fulARytg]J.ALFORD .fHON4AS Ken Muckerroy or- 0" 30/20,13 vs ROBERT McKEIHEN Yage 25 I as Exhil::LE ilTo" " ,ts thaB Lhe deeil yo,u.,::e ref errin,g t,o?

3

2 g. I beJ.i.eve it is, [€s"

3 g" rs bher pr.per*y er.escr,ipt,ion sh.wn for Traet 4 No" r' i:r E:xhibi.t rvo" 2 verb*r.i:m -.. a v*rl>:r'lnr eopy of Ehe 5 der;cript-ton shclrn: in t,hre deed bhaL rrve riho'n you t,hat,,s 5 ber:n Rra::}re,L llxhii:it lVo" :]?

as A" 'Yes" IL ie's er eopy i:rom l:lLat doeu:nent" A" ts it: acbual,,Ly a tr>hot,ocopy o5: t:he A" Yes "

0. derse:r:ljltion :iEs;eIf,?

11 ;\ " Y'es .

1a LZ A. l3o 1t: harsrrr L ber:r: reeyllgcL, it:'s aetuallV ju.sE 13 been eo5lj.er1? L4 A" '[,hatrs r]oi:rcct" ilust a phoEoeopv. 15 0" /\.Lt z.ight " itnei :i.t: you <;er:rnpa::ed t,he <lesr:ript,ion 15 for:' Trae t ltTo" L orr .ENxhibit: )Jo" 2 arrd the eieserl.pE:Lor:

on L7 ExtribiL t\o" 3 f:or E,he sa:nr: Lraet 16 A" llcs"

0" are t:hc:y. j,derrtj.ea.t irr evex,y respeet,?

20 A" tfes" 2L A" tl,rat me e:aJ.l yor.ri: crl-tentiorr t, cr Lhe seelonel 1r:age 22 ol; Exhikr j t I\o " 3 " ,?\nej thez.cr appeaz.s l-rl .be sOin€t rcf,irenee 23 her:e bhert,,l: a eronLirruat-,ion of whabrs on. page 2, z2 A" t{ight "

z3 0" (los'rcre ti)

I

(--

\ T\ .-

'-) ptr: (903r 7sB-2183Gretchen Shore Oourt lleoortino " r-'x: rgosr ""r"

isir-4bsO i;;"*.grerchenshore.conr

CHARLES AND i\4AFiY Ken Muctrelroy on o':olSolALFORD vs RoBl:RT THolllA{i M.KElrHt:N Pager 26 1 A" ycah" 2 p" Is thints al,so ::ef erreci t;o as er rnrnrarcrl 3 reservat:ion i.:rr rvhab has i>ee:n narr{ed a$ Exhibitr lrl,r:" 3?

4 g " r tnl '- r Inr RoE su:rc .t *nde::sLand yorril quesbior:,, =

5 p" rs rha-t a-iso a eorri.ir:'uali-ir:* erf thcr ileseri6rbio* 5 0f a mineral :reservabion t^at is shown i* *re proper:by 7 deseription j,:r tixhil,ib IVer" 3?

B a" I t:hinlc itr is;, }r€s" v Q" AIJ r:Lgl:E " j.s thaE lrorLietn of bhei, pz.operty 10 deserlpt:ion that: is shr:.xrrrl on elre bop of: bhe seeond pag€ 11 of Exh:r-krit I\o" il inelucleet :Ln the eleseri,pB:Lorr, fo:r Tlraet L2 I\o. 1 :rrr Exhibit; I\o" 2?, 13 A" trTo" L4 O" So i.s:LE a farrir.sLa,t,e:mcnL Uhen LhaL Ll:e 15 properLy' deseriSri-ron sho'n f:or ?r;r'ae t \fo" I in Exhibib 15 hlo" 2 was phoLoe:opieel f.ram the ctese:::i.pt,ion rn ExhibiE L1 trlo' 3, buE Eh'e alntire d.esc::ipti.on wals; :?.o8, phoeocopied? 18 A, yeah " ,Ihls entiLe+ de:sc:ription, her,e was 19 photocopied and .plaeed j.nLo thj s 28 a, But noL ZL A exhi.J:iL "

4Z R w. the: entirer eleseri.6rt.ron ;refe::r,r:rg, Lo t,hc 23 mineral. :reserv,altoR/ eor::ect p z2 A. Thab'g eorreeL" 43 0" Olcay " Do V'orr, jrReiw lvh,o nracie bhe clecir;i.o:: Eo

t, \, f\ Gretciten lShore Court Reporling Ph: (903 ) 7sB-2 I B3 '' Fax: (903) ZSB-48€)0 . ww"w.gretchenshore.com .HARLES AND N/Arly L^olJ ALFORD Ken Mucke loy on 0.1/30/2013 vs R.BERI.TH.MAS McKE'.HEN page 27

] i pl:.t'oeo5>y Bhe elescri.pLJ.on or: a po::flion oJ: the ciese'iption 2 frerm Exiri.b:Lt l\er" i] anej i:1se::b it orr thel

i

;rEtaehmenB E.

3 Exhibib I\o" Z? 4 A" :[ be.lieve thab wari I{s" Vaugi:n" 5 p" ConnjeVaughn? 6 a" y'es, €li::" Ie lvon1cl have bee::r *er job as bhe 7 elosero .Uhe etnei prepari:rg 1_Lre doei.unenb, t.o prepare rha I exl:ibi Es "

9 q" l!ow, if yor-i wou,ld, go bereie E' lixhibi* No" Z, 10 w,hi.eh is the derecl Lkrex.e" 11 A" OJeay. L2 0" TJhere, i,s; er refe:dc*ee or:, thc 1:i.rsE pagye r:f E,rrats 13 deerd bo vrr:at is at:eaehed" eran you loeert,e bhaE fo:r ::nei)

14 A" fes" IF A" i\:rd what: j s Lhat r.ef er.erlce i ae th A" llL says, ,'El:*.Lrib:Lt-. A aLt,ac,hed hereto at, Lh<:

L7 joott,onr of T::aet .t and ,l,,r.a(it 2 ";r

a" J\11 r.igiri: " ,[,eb, s see w]tab 1t says Anci :Lt, "

10 :refers tei j.t_ be5,n-gi rno:.€) par:t,ieular.Iy daseribed a mej:es 20 and. bounils cleseriptio:r, eorreerl,/ an AL l+" )i eS. zz O"

uo 't'?r J.rr \r^iir n,.'

J \Jur uJ-,IILLUfJ eLS aauorney pracbicing in 23 E,he area oJ: real erst-,ai-et -l.erw, Lkre dese ript,ien, oj: lfraet 24 Ner " L eon.tained in Erxhlbit: .r\ro. 2 eu:f,f ieiernt i:r ibse.if to 25 icientify tire proper::t,y lteirrg co:r.ueye<I?

;-. -- rt-'r)T(^' Grr:tcherr Shore Court FReporlinc 0 '. -___l

D

{ '.r. /oo'r \vuolr zr5B-2193 Fax: (903) 758-4890 wwyw.gretchenshore.conr

P5i$::':"f)r%YtflXriirl,AL F o RD vs Ro B r: RI rH o M/\ti M cKE |rH rr N

liager 2B itr A" Ye*" Bce;rusc :rt e'enee' tlhe dercrunent that:

2 eonbain* a e(xnp'teee :ne';crs and 'ef berunds eir:sieri,pt:Lon"

J { !" All. *tghb, i\nel ls i:har refcrelnee r;o n lre

any other 4 provisierns rega:rd.inEr bhe doeurnent:

orr a*y oEher: aspecb of 5 t'he doeume*t otrrex' t:ha:r t:he mebcr€i a:rd, bcunds clescripLi.on,i 6 g " Thcrt , ls ther only i:nLerrt the:re i v€s .

/ Q" O]eerv." So t,he j.nbenl_ is nolr, ln yorlz.

opinion, B as bhe preparer of bhe dele u:ne:lt;, Eo :lefer t,cL grrovis:Lons 9 t'hab miqht, af :f e<::b bi,ble any ot;,:er el.eu-rnenL, buE onJy '* 10 bo bhe nreLes ten<l bounds e{eseril:rt:Lon; j.s t,hat erorreeb?

1i A" Yest" OnIy. Lo the nei-.es anel bounds" L2 0" Do yo'ri rcnow .f yer.ur ow* k:rowJ.edge whebrrer Bhrc: 13 parties wcre eve::: Eoget:l:ers, erE 1;lier E:L;nre the F,ixhibib 2 14 and E.he nobe anri the deeel oJ: t::r:st \{ere 'ifo"

srgn.ed?

15 A' 't cl'n"t- ren,ow" rl''ey,r:e they,re ae*nc;wledg<+d 15 0n bhe ea:ne elertc:" But. r. d,on,b kin,ow i.:f ib was bhe same L7 time o:r :noE"

a. Oleay" When d:Ld- yeru l:i.:rsE.l.ear* bha.t bhere was 19 a refe::e:Re e Lo er minere;,I reservat j,on :Ln, l:he descrlptiorr 20 for T:racL No. r- in Lh.e cleser'-tpt;10* useo.:Lrr lixl:1brE, N.o" 2, 2L t,he deetd from tire Jessnps to the AfJ,oros? 22 A" r donst rerneRber ar ela'e" Elu,E l. ttrini< iL was a 23 few yeerrs afber the d,oeurrienus \^,e,re prepar:ed" 24 A" And_ 1:or,r dld_ y.ou -t_earn, Lhrat? 25 A. r - - l, bhink ,r{v-'s " f orcJ v;as iir.r the :i.ce in A.1, 'f:f

(903) 758-2 tB3 * Gretcfren ljhor_e Court Fieponrng Fax: tgoet 7s'-abbo"r' ***.gretchenshore.corn

CHARLES AND N.ARY LOU ALFORD Connie Vaughn on a1BAt2Oj3- - -

VS ROBER'THOIV.AS IV'CKEIl'HEN Page 1

A TT4 tr vnvd& C l{v. a1lr 1 .

r.T/'1 UV-f2-9344^

2 C|HARLES ATD MARY LOU TN ?HE D]:STRICT A T,EIADN COU:RT

Plainbi ffs, +

0b-

5

ROBERT THOMAS McI(EITHEN, EOG RESOURCES, INC " , A-I\fD CENTRAL TEXAS !ru\u .7 SERVICES

De:Eendant,s. SA}'T AIJGUSTI,NE COTJNTY, TEXAS Y

1n

11

L2 ORAL DEPOSITION

EONN]:E VAUGHN 1A JAI.IUARY 30, 201.3

1'

ORAL DEPos'TTo\T oF C..I\^TTE VAUGHN, pr.duced as eI 11 w:Lt:Ress ae bhe inst,arree of Ehe plainEiffl: and duly swornr w€ls baken in t,he above-styled and -nurbered cause otr JAlfi.IARy 30, 20I3, from 3:15 p.m. to 3r51 p":m., b,efore zv funber Hogue, eerL:Lfied shr:rthand Repori:,er:

in and for t,he 4! Stat,e of Texas, reporecd J:y eomputerized, stenoCype zz machine at, i:he offices of J" Ken Mucke.Lroy, 10g Fost,er ZJ Street, Clent,er, Texas 7S935, pursuant, Lo t,he Texas Rules 24 oi: Civil procedure and t,he provj.sions staLed on t,he z5 relcord or, at,t,ached. hereb.o,

Gretchen Shorr: Courl Repoftino Ph: (903) TSB-2183 * Fax: (903) 7SB-4890 - ww"w.gretchenshore,com

PLAIN'TIFFS' EXHIBilT'C

CHARLE{i AI\D N4AIIY LOU ALI:ORI) Connie Vaug;hn on 01/30/20'13 vs ROBElll' t.HOiViAS McKEt'IftEtrl page ,9

1

a "

l{ow, bhere i s o,n t'his dereument,, on t,he f i::sit, ---A ]

pa!/e, a seotlon wjEli a su,bbitle, t'Reserv6rtiOns fronr eorxvcyaRec ancl warrarlty . rr Do yotr sce trha.t?

1

A" yes, sir"

E

0" jtnd is Lhere any x.eser:vabion fzonr bhe h eor).veyanee shown on Lhe fi*ee of t,LraE deted,?

,1 A" es, str," Jl

o

a" ]urd whaL is t_ha1:.?

o

A" Jl fu'l be*ef i L in use of r.,racb 2 for ''OSSeSsion 1R the rema'i'neier of t-.he 1i-fe of g:rerrr'or as a life esr=ai:e"

11 +* a" I)oes L}:e.t compeir:t vrit_,h v,rhaB y,ou were rnsEj:ueted L2 to do o:n, t,he iriLals:e sheet Lh.ar y.eru have, Ilxtribit, Iyo, j-?

li A" lles, sl',, wiL]: Lhe eneeption of Lhe aereagye"

L4 This stsyg l:our-and.-a-herlt aeres ern Bhrs sheee, &fld .P T::act 2 erorrsists of t,wo ac:res, JO O " ,t-her bhan. thaL, is Lher.e any dif f erenee: 17 b*bween wJreri- Lhe i*sbructi.on.s show oR Exhibit \rs" 1 arid what, the cleleel pr.ov:icies ?

10 A" llo, sir "

A" i\11 i:ighrt" i\'el is L'ere any ref erene e i,n ttre 2L deled iLsell: Lo any.rninererl reservaL:con? AZ A, lio, srx. ,

la 0" ]rnd deieg t,hat e nr1:Iy vrj.t,h the ir:st:r.ue bierntii you

e

4.r rereeive<j, oi: t,he irr.fcrmabion you had for purpose of 43 preparaUrorr of eloeu:rre:rt,s?

I .-- \_Tq= Gretchen Shore Cc_rurt -;'

fReporiing (903) /58 2183 " ItrErx: (903) Zgs-4gg0 www.grei:chenshore.conr

CHARLES AND t'Atiy Connie Vaugt^r on 01 ,30120 i3 vs ROBI:RT -Ti.1O'ArS McKE:]t_HI:N ^LOU.,AIFORD Pager 20

;; jr.

A " yes;,

R

)40 Diet tl e partj.es i:nitia.l. t,hat deedi

n

sir.

Yesl, q e" Notv, l;rE t*e tinre Eirat f*e perr'ies s:,gned, ,this 5 doeurirent:, I rrtab:Lee L':at: Lhe:re erppears t;o be fernr 5 init,ials, e or.:s.ec:g? i A. fhat :;"s cor,r,ee t: .

o H U. Do yorr Jcnow vrhether. r:r, not a.l,I fou,r par.Eies v werc p:relsent *t, the sarne Errrrc oi: rf t,h'se irltials were 10 plaeed on the eloeu:nent ab elif f r:r<lnL Linres? 1i A" I don,,i: reeal,I. L2 A" Do have einy trle'so'a.I reeerllee t.ior: of 1rs11 13 whether t,he rrels*iups a:rcr th,e *\lr1ords v/Grr,c ever Eogethcr irr L4 your of f iee at; i:he same t,i:ne? 1E IJ A" I don, i; reea-i.I "

15 O, Do yotL }:ave erny,r.creol.l.eebieln o:f any L7 convc'sa.t'ion bet;wee* t.h.e rJ'essLrSrs-i ancr Lhe Arforcls? 18 A. l\o, s:i.i:" 19 A, Do y.ou have any reeoliee t,ion, of anything Ehat; 2A Lhe ,Jess'ups :ray frave ev,er saj.d tto yor"r e.bout bh:ts 2L Eransaction; ZA A" IVo, sj,r'" 23 A, Do yor.r have any reeollecti,rn, of anyt):ring Ehat, f ha A1 r.v ftarA gvp ,,,.*y !taVe s.r.itJ, Le you abc.rut- Elris LransaeEion.?

A" Iio, sj.r.

Cjretcfren llhorc+ Court Reportlrr g Ph: (903) 7sB-2183 Eax: 1o-0sl isi-+ei)o * www.gr.eichenshore.com 35ffii;,fiil#iiilr!-fiulAlFoRD vs rioBERr' r'HoivrAs McKErrirE1\ page 21 r1n g" Oleay" j\L th,e tirne bh:Ls clseu.rnerrt, -l Ejxtribj.e I*o. 2, wa,s rlra*Eeel lty yeiu, was :Lt your ir,rten' to pr,vlde in t'his do*i'rnent any 'eype of resc*i:vaeiCIn of mineralrs bv bher Jessiupr; p

5 A" ]iior st L" 5 P' hfow, ret:'s rooie at bhe an at,LaehrnelnE tr: 7 ExhibiL N'o, 2 uneie:r Trael: .l i{ne1 1s " Ehere, in bhaE I deseript:Lo:l uncler Trae t- .t, any ::clfer.ence to a reserva"i:ion 9 of :minc::.alll p

10 A" 'fes, si:/-." 11 O" i\il1 :.ig*." Did yeru lcnervr bl:at Ehats referoreG) F^ L2 a 'eservati"o* of *irre::ars was tn t.}:aE e{eserlpbi.on al: i:he 13 t:Lnre El::ts eloer:nrerlt; was pre5lared? i"4 A" )[o, si]:"

a" Olray" Carr von e:xpla:Ln, Lo us how r E, was ts,trat:

16 E,hab der*c:rl"pElon wit,h Lhat: erc*ee ,s,ef t,e, a resey:vaLion of L7 min.eralrJ e;tme to "br: atLaehed Er: this de,ed?

A" ?'1e11, ll rvcrulc{ herver :nacle a eopy from trhe 19 p::evious de:ed of L'e eiesei:!.p,tlo:* Lo bhe prope:rt;y erb 2Q thats was rRlr tnecnt:ron, i:hcrt ap1:errernbly there I left in 2L tirc mine'a-1" reserviabiern that was on, th*t previous d*ed."

22 Beleause ib rooke r i,re it just eclnLinues d,ewn Lh.at p;lge"

23 a" And. r,vas t;ha,t :Lntention.al in 'leay" any wa,rr?

24 A. I[o, sir" z3 0" I)id yor"r bel:ieve at the t,irne thaE you a'La<::hecl

\ -T\* r.-) oretclren

G

.s]ro re C;ou rt Rerporl.i n g Pf r: (903) /58 21S3 F€rx: tgOgl iSil-abbO'"Y' \/ww.gretchenshore.conr 35ffii:fiil.ofliillrbfiulAlFoRD vs ROBE'RT rHor\'rAS M.KErT tEN pW 22 I t,hat, deseript:rorr, i,:reluded that; .rcferer*C:e Eo al wl,LicLL -_l 2 mineral reservat:to:r, that: you wer.c ear:r:ying ouiE Ehe 3 wishes of eiilre:: of the pare5,e,si; 4 g. Can yelu resberEe ghat, J:o:: rneT,

0" Dld y<>u Joelieve, at, ,[he t,:L:me b]ra,t you aebaehed bhat' desieript:Lo:r bhert eorrta:i.*erl thal- :ini:rer,ai. ::eservat,ion,, bhae yclr"l lvere ea::rying ouL wj:at, t-he j.ntenL of bhe parb:Leri;

was ?

3 A" No, si"r"

1R (Exhib:LL 3 rnac.lcecl" )

11 A" Let :ncl shovr yolr wherL,s "oeerl nrarleed as Exhi,bit:

1a &A No.3" Ancl tlLat:rs aR e,Id,er clec:ci, I)o you:reeoqniae iU?

A' That i.s - - a:ppear:br Lo bc t,he same dese:ription 1t 4= bhat T copieet fr:om -* 0" oleay "

th A, f or: Lhis exhibit "

17 0" Ole ay . Does i:lra"t appcr6rr to b€, l.he souree of bhc;

1A descri6>bion Ll:at; you eop:iecl anel plactetd on aBtached t,o tc under Lhe title ,Iract. "i, uneler the deed, birat yor.1 p:reparedi, 20 A" yes, sii.r" ZL A" Oleay" By ther lvay, thcrrers a, retfere*ce J:ere" tz 3E says so:nekreldy -- :Lt. a.ppears t,hat soniebody handwrot,el 4J *R "Tra.eE, 1r' anil underli.:reei it. Do yr:u ]enow w,ro wraBe zzi bhab i::.? 1,3 A. ThaL vrits me"

\_T\ (irelel'en lihc-rre Cour t ,F?r+nnrl Ph: (903) 7 sB-2183' rax: \vyv, irrn Ur rv 't loiiel isl]+ebo'"Y"',i),Ju'*.g*,t.hersnore.com 35ffit |-- i:.fiii #ilil,b8.u1AL Fo RD vs lRo BE RT rH o MrAS McKE r"r s EN

Page 23 0"

And bl:aL was not Srarb oJ: the petrbion bl:at you 2 aetually c<lpiccl, eorreet,,i 3 31 " hlr: r €ilr .

4,a " V" ]Now, wheR we say copi€d, are w€) referring tro 5 yotr looki.n<y ab ib ancl ,L,herr :t:et,yping iL, c)r are we Lalking 6 abotrb yorr. ileEuarlly photoe,epying ther pr.:i,or: deed,)

A" .i. photocogrj,ecl t.he prioi: eleed. 0 " i\nd cloeri Lhe de,ser:ip L:Letrr Ehat; , s showr.r otr 9 E:xiribiL jZ irneiez,Ti:acL "1, rfr:es it eo::t,ajn everything Lhat 10 the descJ:itr:Liorr :r.n t;he 1:r:l_r:r: deecl hae?

11 A" 'ld'es, s:ti:, with, i:he exeept,ion of wherc:

r w:rol:e L2 ir: Traet: 1, rJ I < u'

d e, I've11, ger erl:ear'- arrit 100,rr 1r:

tkre seeonci pr*g* clf L4 ExhiblL No 3 "

A" lfo, sir. JJhr!.s Srar:t :is nee rrreluded.

a" tio Eherers a por:.Li.on <tf ttrc grrope:rty L7 descripL:,jo:r that ref:ers to er m-r-ner:a,,1 rerservatiern s56wrr rn :"8 t1:er prior.<ieed, w'ielh i.s Iixhibit |.o. 3, t,krat was no1:

19 a<:tually collied !.nLo th:i"s cjcred t1rat, you did, eorreet?

za A" Jfes, si.r:, 2L A" Oicay. IVovr, yo.u aPParenbly nert,arized or w(|r€r 22 bher not,a.r,y on 6,ts to r:z'tr:ok bire sig;naturers erf Eh,e 23 Jelssups n celrrecL? 24 ;\" Yes, sir... /lce c;z,cl:i,ng to t,his "

z3 f1 +r iJ " r.,rr_l VO(] IrdV€ any ii€)eo.t],etclt,:Lon of aetually <io5.rrg

( ].s pf r : (eoi] ) 7 s8.2 1ru 9'"!':ll9i,; otj T#3.N;Ltt"q " mn* s retch e nsh ore con, 35ffit i:,tH.o #iiiLbfiu.iAl Fo RD vs rR o B E: Rr rH o M,A$ McK E I rH I: N F,ago 2.4 1 t,hab ?

2 g " No, s:i.r "

ol^ u" uK€tV," ea* you teIJ. ,cRr: i-or1ay, of yorrtr eiwn 4 memory' whab eiLl:er Mr. err lvJrs. u;,essuIr l0okrird r,irre, bheix. 5 appearatlee, ernyi:hing aber.urt; .bl:ernil 5 g " $Io, s:tr "

7 q" Just a, eonrpletc: b.lanlcil B a" yes,, r;tr" 9 p" Al.t ri"ght. ?\r:et I assrurre frorn yout:, aiiswers and 10 your previousr atrswes,s, that yetrr have ner reeollecEio* of 11 eibher t;hc ufcrs;srrlls or t,rcr i\J.fo::<ls asJe:Lng you a)ty L2 quesblons o e o:;,rcle E? 13 A" No, sj"r" L4 A" Was it: yr:ur grr.acLj.ce vrhen ,yori or 15 partieipat'ed j,n the sd.g::rng of; €r cr"oe'runerne and aeted as a 15 no'ary t,o go ovcl:: bhe t,e:s:ns of Lh,e dor:urnenb wit:h B'e L7 parties? 18 A" yes, sir" 19 O" Was that a1wayg your I>x.aeEJ,e e ?

2Q A" yes, slir "

2L A" Was tiralt simlrly that yori clj.d as a ma,Eee:r of 22 your personar eiroiee o' rvas t,hat: sornart,h,irrg thal: yr:u werc 23 instruebed that ysu must do? 24 A" Mr" Mr"reke1roy. h.ael nre cler bhat_" 25 0" Oleay." And wb.at wsuld you Lyp,ica,tl.y <io when

/--.- \ f{.-) Ph: (903) . , Gretchen -.ttj3 . Shore Courl F?eporiinc 7SB-2 Fax: fgo3) isS:agbii-Y" *#*.grertcherrshore.com

iroRD vs RoBERr rHor\4AS McKE'

3|,ffii:,iinu#iilLbfiulAl 'EN Page 25 I pa;rt,*es weJic si,t,Ei,ng in fronb r:f you a:cicl gett,i*g 1^a;a r{rr #'a o v'^vJ UV 2 sign a ilocrunent, Ii..*el a eieeel or a eieed erf brust?

r /{" !vcr', r weru"Lel aetual'y' go over *he enbire 4 elor:u:ncnb w:Lth therrl" .r w.uler present tkre cioer.*nent" An,d 5 I il say, bhis ts t,he in bhis perr I EieuI€Lr ase, warranev e

5 deed wit:h the v.endorrs 1icn, I werrrld ge €)ver g:rant,orrs 7 narne, gz'ant:eetg R€rrR€r, b'e onsicier:abion, eaeh, properLy

e

B deseripb:rori bha,b was Ii.stecJ,, t,he: r:eservat:rons LhaE were 9 lisrt'ed" r rvour-d :reeret LhaL over. ter brrenr and asre if j:hat 10 war:r eorree t:u if Lher,e tier,3 any adelit,iorral reservations eo 11 t"her eonvey€ulcc a:rer wa:rrantsy" we v,rourd ge over if if L2 E'hcrc wi,"ri ;i rnen,tlern o:L an'y rcind of t,ax prora.ro* ()r 13 anyLhin<y, we wourer *re*tio:: that at- Lhe t,ime"

And r woutd L4 ask: Ehern iJ: Ehey hael any (JucsL:Lons before signing"

A" :.:r eonjunert,ion lv:i_th i:tre signi,ng of Ehis deeel, 15 Exhribi t, i\o , Z- _

't?

A" lles , s:lr. ,

A" die{ yort LeIl eithe:r, the ,Terssups or.. Ehe 19 Alfords il:trL the::er i e somcl IancJlta€Jc :Ln Ehi s preipertlr 20 deseriptj,on as bo Trae L lV<;" 1 abrrut, Lhe, grant,ors 2L reservj-rrg. er mineral re€jer\r€r,LLOn,r) az A" I[o, sir." z5 0" Jir:d why rljd you nots i;ell.l. Lhenr t,hae? z2 A" Ireeause i'e:rer w6rs no ::eservat,ion list,ed hrlre, 25 anc{ we rveuJ"d have hael a i:€)servat:i..n Iiet,ed he:re i,l: t:hai: (-,.-, \ Tq s-) Ph: (90ri) rsB-2183 .

Gretchen Shore Court fle;poriinc rix: (g-oal isg+ebo"Y" **'*.gr*,.henshore.conr

CHARLES A\D \IAIIY LOU] AUFORD vr;. ROBER]" TFIO[/AS McKEIIH[:N Connie Vaugnn orr O1/301201:j Page 26 1 would ,have been Lhe intent,ion ofr bhis eloe*o*or"-_-- --=l 2 P" wc'e )fou everi aw€1:re at bhe Lime you went over 3 t,his docwnent wi.th ther,n that bhis ref:ereRce bo a 6irlu"u, 4 reservation sl,ovm urrde:r. I,raet ,l on, i:,irer aEtachecl page was 5 even b,herre ?

5 g" lVo, si.::" 7 q" Ol<ay " Af t.e:r bh j.s; elor:nnienl- lve.s prepa:r.ed, el"o yor.r I lcnow what happerred to thenr, th:rs cleed that,s Exhibit:

9 llo " 2, a,:rrd t.fr,a:re wac al,so eter:el of Lr,usb, el &Rd a nofle 1"0 signed aL t,he sarnc Li:ne, d.o Yoti ]enovl r,vhat- r\ras doRe wit,h 11 t,hose doeumeln,t,s,i, L2 A" f eerRrt say for sure vriEh thj.s set of 13 doeumenbs" L don,L :r,eeta.t1" yo,rr lcnow. But j.b appear:s L4 here t,hat we aeclepted g2,/0 fror p:r'eparaeion wlttr ni:

15 eollee:ion fo:(. z:eeordj.:r:g f ees "

R Oleay" So yori. eoncl.ucle frorn that whal:?

1a A Tha.t Lhrc partry we>ul.e1 have t;ak:err l:he doeualent,si 1"8 to have Lhem rec:ctrcled L:l:e:nselvcrs "

Iq R Bo All ri.ght " l\:rd, .l.cL, er 1_all< abo*L Lhai: ref ererreo 20 the ,$270 . Ttrere's a. rlat e arrcl bhe:r€lrs a ehe,::lc nurnber "

2L Do you k:Row who wroLe t,hert on there? AZ That j.s rny hel,ne,trv:ri t.ing "

4J R Ca:n you te1.1, f:ro:rn that lvho ae.b,ua_IIy rnade 24 papnenE eo yeu?

l5 IVo o s j.:r."

( tS Cjretclren lihore Court Reporting Ph: (903) TsB-21tj3 . nix: loooj igi:+airo 'i- r*'r.grntchenshore.com

CAUSE NO. CV-12.9344 CHARLES and MARY LOU $ IN THE DISTRICT COURT ALFORD, $ $ Plaintiffs, $ $ vs' $ or $ ROBERT THOMAS McKEITHEN, $ EOG RESOURCES, INC., and $ CENTRALTEXAS LAND $ SERVICES $ $ Defendants. g SAN AUGUSTINE COUNTY, TX

ORDER DENYING THE ALFORDS'MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

Before the Court is the Alfords' motion for summary judgment. After considering the

pleadings, the parties' briefs, the arguments of counsel, and the relevant authorities, the Court

DENIES the motion,

.2013.

-'

JUDGE PRESIDING

ORDER DENYTNG THE ALFORDS' MoTIoN FoR SUMMARY JUDGMENT PAGE I OF ]

NO. CV- 1"2.9344

CHAIILES and NtARy LOU ti.LtrORD.

plaintiffs S l,V I'FIII I)j|ST'RICT'COURT

VS.

ROBERT THOMAS Mct{EIT,rtE}i. $ 0p EOG RESOURCIjS tNC.. anct CENTRAL TEXITS I,AND SEI{VICES.

[.]efendanis rs SAN aL;GUSTINL, CCUN ty, t.EXAl!

EI"aINTIEIL.I:-TJt{xRr)_AM&r[-x.]!*i{}_ar&IGIL\,AJ.r_rE,rI-T{a}{

TO TIIE HONORABL,E.IUDCiE OF'

SAID COTJFI'I:

Now colrrili, cl{ARLI]s anclMAllY t,ou AL,FOI*I), he,rr:irLafterreferred to as,,plaintiffs,,,

complaining of RoIIIIRT TFIOMAS Mcl(EIl'FlEtrr, EoG RElioUllcES, lNC., ancl cEN.tFG.L TEXAS LAND SITRVICES, het'einafter retbrred to as "l)r:fbr1d.nts." and fbr causo .r action show as follows:

1.

DISCCV LrltY

Plaintiffs intend to concluct cliscoi,cry uncler I)iscovery lllarr Level 2.

),.

.IURISDICTiOI\

This court has jurisdiclion over the subjeet.

firattel oJlttrii;case as well as jurisrlir:tio' over the parties.

I']age i Allbrci v ivlcKeithen. et rti -1c .Antn(l l,ctn

3.

VENU]]

Venue is llxrper under'l'Exns rllvll PRac'r'rcE & lrGvtDrE:; cous $s 15.002 an<l 15.011.

4, PAR]'IES

Plaintiffs ilre residents of isan Augr.rstine Count1,,,fexar;,

Defendant Robert Thotna:; Mct(eithen is a reside't o[]iacogdoches county, .I.e;<as, and is before this court lbr all pu4)oselj'

fhe defendant is nan:Led i' this r;uit in (1) trrs represe't:rtive capacity as the In<lepe'dent hclrni'istrator of the Estate ol'Jar;k pershi'g Jessup, l)eceasecl;

(2) ,is capacity as Guardian of the Estilte of Jack Pershi'6i JessuP; ancr (:l) i' his i'clividual cap'city as an heir or beneficiary of the decc<lent to the extent that he indi'jdually succeeds to the rights a'd obligations of Jaci< Pershing 'ler';sttF and has personall1,be'efittecl fi.orn elaims oi'.w'err;hip to the minerals in question ill this s;uit, irLcludi'g oollection oI le:ass 6.rrses, royalties, .r .ther consideration as a r:esult of ow,ership of the minerals i' q uestion,

Defendant lloG Resou'oeri' Inc., is a co'poration .rganr;red a'd existi'g uncler tlie lar.l,s of the State of Delar.i,a.e, a'd is ber.bre this cor.rrt for.ar purtr)osc)s.

Defenda't certtral Texa's La'd services is im assunrecl of R. w, lla'rilton, Jr. a'd 'anre Sabrina L. Hamilton and is belirre this court lbr.arl purpoi;es,

rail'r's Plaintiffs ancl Jack Jessull itttd Annie Elizaberh Jersr;up we:re neighborr; and {iiends for many yeal's' on April 2i"'2003, Jae:k.lerssup and his wifc, An'it: ElizeLbt:t[r Jessup, executed a wa*anty Deed with vendor's Lie' (here,fte:r refb*ed to as "Lh(: clee<J")

cc,'.,reying to plaintif'ts rhree lrrLc's ,rf Page 2 Alford v lVlcKeithen. et al 3d Annd Pern real p''openy in S;r'Au.o'ustine ccltnty, 'l'exas. A true and cortect copy of the dee<j is attached to this petition' incorporate<1 by referenc'e, and marked ar; Exbibit lt. 'fhe three tr'c,ts co've1,e<1 are identified by desi';r'iptio'attaclir:d are "T'ract one" consisling of I 1,/.50 acres of lanrJ; ,,.l.ract ll-.n,o,, consisting of 2 acres' more or iess; ancl "Tract T'luee" cor*;ir;1ing of Jack p. J,:s;sup,s uncli'icled interest in and to 9 acres out of iL I 1 0.5 acre tract ir:r San Augustine (Jounty. ,l.he .le:ssutrls resided on the two acre tract.

The Jessr'ps the Alfonls vvent to the lau,oIfir;es ''d olI(en v{uckelroy i' san Au5;ustine county' Texas' to give instt'ur;tiOrrs reg,arcling the rJratting o1. legal documentr; to perforrn their agreement to sel1 and purchase t he' lht'ee tracts. T'ht;y expla i'ed rhat the Alfbrcls were purc:hasing 1.he tluee tracts described in rhe cleed, ',vith $70,000 pairi up 1L'oi,rt ancl a baLlance of $70,000 pairJ in annual i'stallments of $ l0'000, the balarrce beari'g ro inte'est, .ncltl:rat the Jessups wer0 r:eselving a life estate on their horrse anrl tvTs etc:res;

of land sold, lio mentiorr rvas rnacre of a rer;ervation, 'ri'erar The deed itself' rln whi<:h the pa'ties placeci their iriitial:i a1. rr sectio' e'titled ,,Iteserrzations From conveyance and warranl'y,'' sho\4's their ag.eernent. ['ht: sole reservation was the siatement that there existecl "a l'eserviLtion of ttie t.uli possession, benr:fit. arcl use of J.ract .frvo for: the remainder of the life of GLanlor, :Ls;

a iif.e estate.,,,

In supplying a lr3gsl ciescr.iption of l.rac1 One the draft,:t. of the deed attachecl a pr.operrry description taken *om a prior conve,yance to Jack Jessrup by I-.i:i. Fountain arid wiib, Minnie Fountain, c'c' BuLrns and wifb. ir4ary Elurns, and J,rS. Jessup arrcr r,i,ifi:, Una Jessr.rp, o1 the 1 17.5 ac;re tract' That deed lvas executecr on lray' ?.4, r950 and is fiir:cr o1.r.e<;ord in Vol. 101i, page 49g, Deed Records of San Augustine CournLy, Texas.

l'age 3 Alfold v Mci(eithen. et al 3d Amnd l)etn

The earlier deed includr;d a reservation of mine.air;. 'r lre: rJrrLfter inadveft.ntly inr;ludeclthis mineral reservati.n by copying sonre but not all of the desr:riptirx ul;ed in the earrier 1950 cJeed.

l\o reset'vation was agreecl try therJe'ss;ttps and the Al'forcls, bu1 ratht:r: vrars inselted as a result o,f a, errol b1, the drafter or :cri\\_,ner ol'tlir_, <jr.,ecl.

REQUtTiST' FOR npci-fnhTOn y nlDrjMElrr THAI'THI1 WAIT*I\NTY DEED BY T'FIE TO PLATNIIF]IS DID NOT REtiER vE ANy orL, cAS oR o'Ftt't MINIIRALS AS; A M/.,I'II]R OF LAW UN-DER 'ESSI]]]S i'f.(J ],R.OVISICNS

The deed ll'on, tlie Jessups 1o Plaintiffs is not ambiguous uLird can be consrrueci Lry the co'rt fi'om the language they rrsed withirL thr: fbur corners of th<: docurLe't.

Under the terms c,f thr: deed itself there was no reservation ol,oiJ, gas, or other rrLinerals by the: Jes;sups.

1.he prrrper:t;, description attached was incorlroratod soieJl'

fot'thr: purpose of'providing a rlletes and bounds der;criptioir of the tracts conveyed' lt does not res':11'\'e:

an\' mineral interesri; ir:L the ,rer;srrps, despite the error ri' copying the entire descript'ion' including er reference to a reservatiorr oimi'erals, because the attacrment containing that relerrenlc0 was n,t irtcorporateci for ihe:pr.rrlrosr: .f 1rr'vicli'g a substarrti'e provision in the deed.

Plaintiffs t'equest that thr;: clourt construe rhe deecl irr quer;tion and juclicialiy find arLd declare, under the authority granted the'Crr-rrt by c'hapter.:ig, Tnxns crvr- pRectrce & l{pvEor.s corp, that under the terrns of the deerl it'sel1'that the grarrtol's, Jaclc aird A.'nie Elizabertr Jessup., dicl resel've or retain arty intel:est 'ot i'the oil, gas, attd othe''rinera.ls in .r urider the tracts of.larrd described therein.

Page 4 Allbrd v N1cKeithen, et al 3cl Antnd Petn

]MUTUAL MIST'A](E

7.

TI'E RIi.ci'R'VA'ION OF MIIJEI*rLS Ii,,r TIIE DEED V/At; PIIODUCT OF MLrTtitrL IVISt-,2\t{.8

The deed ils d.afted rl'es rtcit contain the "truc agrr:enre't" of tlLe parties trecause it rerfers to a mineral reservalion in the attached property cleseriptio::r thal rvas not par.t of tire bargiain of the parties. The instruction to tlie iJreLfter or scrivener was ihat the orly reservation by lhc srellers was of a life estate. The initials of lhc JreLrties on the face: page or"the ijee<J of eonveyanoe showeil tfrat the only reservation tirev agreed t. was of a life estate fbr ther Jess,pi;. J;Lck Jessup ancl Annie rilizabeth Jessup knew at tlLe rime of the conveyance that there was no a{lrcjerrient to reserve; lhr: mlnerals because they had instru<:ted tlic dr;Lftsrnan otherwise, l.hr;:rejbf,3, tvhile the rnistake ma.g not have been pointed out to them thcy hzxl knowleclge tirat therrer was no agreement fbr a reservalion of minelals; therefore, any mislakej \vil.s nrlltual.

The parlies went together to the o ifice of thc draftel or scrive;rer of the cleecl to have the <Jeed prepared and neitlte'party sok:J1'

e rnployed him. Thus, no el'for or mistake by the draftsnran can be attributed solely to one of the p;u1ies,

I'IIIl DEED SHOUI,D NE NPSI'<Irt-rr,tED I.O RI]}IL]]CT I FI]]

TRT]]] INTEN'| OII TH]i I,AI;|]I}:)S

when an illsLrunlent rloes tltlt t'er1'lect the trui: agreremeLLt of'the parties becauserof'a.n error by the drafter or scrivenel:, a' muillat ntistahe occul's. IrL that case tht: deed should be rrlfbrneclto reflect the actual intent attcl agrereme:rtt of tire parties as of the clate the cie:ecl vras made. A'y retorrualion of the deed relates back to the date of its execution. I)lainriils l'eciilest rhat the court find that the

Page 5 r\lford v McKetthen, ct al J0 Amno lJ ett)

Wananty Deed u,ith Ve,ndor,s l_i;n executed on A.pril25, 200'.\,ancl{iled of record on tht:25,h clay of April, 2003, in the office ol, the Couirty Clerk of Sair :\ugu;itirLe County, Texas, und,3r File No.

7437, was the pj.oduct of nu"rtual mistahe a'd order it ref'orrned to correctly rellect the actual agreement of the par-tiet;.

'Io reforrL the d,:ed irr suc,lr a rnaruler requirers only that the Court order that the following portion of the pr.otrrerly rJescriplion unrjer Tract One bre d<:leted aird removed fi"otr the dei:d and of.

no force and effect_:

It is hereby unrierstood atrcl agreed by ancl betweerl the parties herr:Lo thal the grantors lrr:rein reserve in their own r.iglrt one half of all mirLeral rights of e.very kind ancl character .*t i.t, nray be on or un<ler the: above described tract of land wjth the right oI in1.r,ress ancl egrr:ss over and on s,icl lil'd fbr the purp.se, of nri'nin1; u,riia.ltring iJ. oir anrl othel: mint:t'als withoui interference of assigns or his assiqns.

DI S Co vIrR ). o t- c L nrMc)p,u{ vtlt TLIA L VIS TAKI Plaintiffs l^/e''e al all tinres (lware of the act.ual ternls of their agreement rvith the Jess;u1rs to purchase the property irL question i.n this suit. T'hey werr: also a."vzrre of the rer's of tlie d.eed to which they had afjjxed their initjals, but uot aware that a nr inerai r.esl3r.vation contilinecl irr an earlier description from att old <leed \'vtts il1.tacl'ied to their rleecl, They cr'icl not cliscover, and cou'J not discovered by the exel'cirse of reas<xrabJe 'ave diligence ilris err'r, llri'r t' 2011.1n fact, tley hacl leased the minerais themselves in 2007 after ii was reptes(:nted tc, thenr by l)efendant Ce:ntral .I.r:xas l,and Services that they owned the rnit Let:iLls.

T'hey learned in20i0 that an oil and gas prrducer leased these minerals in ancl urnder their 'ad lancl ancl clairnecl that plainrifls rvr:re not [he ow'ers.

l'age 6 Alford v McKeithen, et al 3cl Amnd Petn

DEC]LA RATOR \. UDGME,\i,f .1

rtLAlM FoR,lviANooiSo, rN; {Ji\crIoty 9o, IN THE AI,-fI'].NA'IIVE, NEN:i,Nrr.,'TOF:Y JI.]DGMENT The debtors (Plaintifts)

olr the note execute<r to Jack I,. .lessup and u,ife,, Annie I!,riruo"rn Jessup' on April '25,2003,have 1,lly paid and saiisfiecl the pr.rnirisory note an<J are e'titled to a release of the vendor's rien ancr dt:ed of trust rie'.

.praintiJf,; have rc,quested arerr:asr: of ,ch65s 1i.r, andsubmittedapi'oposedrele.st:tothedefe'clant,lr.obertl.'homaslvlcl(eithen.

De:fb'danthasfaiied andrefusedtoex{lcllteaLndreturntheProposedReleaseo1.L,ierrs.

l}laintifl.srequestthatthecourt issue a mandatorf inj unction or:dt:ring said defbnclant to rlxe'ute a'd deliver. a rr:lease of. the liens referred to above' In tht: alteru'tive, Plaintiffs l'equest thert the Court find eurd3u,licially declare in its judgment that the lierts refr;trecl 10 above have bce.

satisfied i' full and are cleclare:clreleased a'd authorize Plaintifls 1o t'ecord thr: jrrdgrrrent in the official I,ubJic Rccords of sla'

county.

Texas, in the oifice of the ^ugustine Courrty Lllerk.

CLAIM I,oF: I )Ec,La]tirrr onr.

JLi[rr]ypp1.

REC;ARDING OWNERtiHIp OF t\4ti,itrF.ALS Piaintiffs i ncotp.rate ther fiLc:tual allegatio's se I out as a basis for their: ahemative craim 'bovr:

for Declaratory R:1ie1'' They bring, this claim under challter J'/ of'the TExes c.rvrr. pnecrrcE & Revpotps cooE' They tire perr':ions intt:res;ied uncler. a r,r,i11, rvritlcrL contract, .r other writ;ing whose rights' status' or legal t"eliitions are atlbcted uncler thilt ()onrl.a(:t or wri1.ing. T.hey seek a deterrnination of their rights under 37'04 s of th<: 'fE>ras crvri- pr:lsr.rL'rcrr & I{pH,,pirrs coor.

In the alternative to their plcading,s of nutu'i rnista.ke and reeluest for reformation set out in

r3tc / alfbrci v Nlcl(eithen, er al 3d Amnd Petn sections 6-8 of tlLis petition, Plai'tiffs show that evern if trrey are uiiabre to reform the Jr:ssup deed to them based on tntttual mistake there is a dispute over rvh.at rnirrerals they orvn a'<i they rire entitled.

to a construction of thr; rights of the parties uncler thal deed. sllecifical[y, tirey show that the description mistaltenly used fo;: 'fract one leserved in the granrors onry ,,one-rrar''of iil.L mi.neral tights"' and thereby Flaintifli;

wet'e ver;ted with, at a rnini'ru'r, ,'e..half of the mi'e'al i'tr:rest thal the Jessups owned as o1,the date ,rf.conveyance. .t.h,: Lr:servrLti.rL states:

It 1:;her:eby unrlerstood and agreed by anrJ l:retrveren the partier; her,;to that the grantors; rrerein resel.ve in iheir own l.ip,ht one harf.of.all mineral r.ights of'every kind and ,har.r,.t*, ,vhich ma', be on or under tht: abov': desffibed tract of land wlth ttr,: r igtrt of ingress ancl egrrss over and on said l,a'd 1br rhe purpos. and other minereLls without interfbrence ot n,,in;n,3 ;i'jff;;, i"o.

o1'assigns; or his ",, assisns.

12"

NECESSI'y FrfR DII.LAILA'.Ry r,rEr,irF R'cARDlNc 117.5 Aclttl'IRACT AND EOG R.I]SOLTRCES, rNa.

Defendanl refust:s to utchn0',r,,1er111e that, at a mininr um, F laint.iffs own one-half of lhe oil, gas and other mineralr; that the Jessupr;

ow'ed as of t.[re dlite o1 their 0onveyance of thr:

1j7.s'.cre tract to them' while a<:f ing ars the Gual'clia' of the Estate cif Jack r). .ies;sr.rp, Mcl(eithe' executed a lease agreement with EOG llesources, Inc., l':asing all the nLineriils in ancl under the r 17,50 acr.e tr.act even though he does not ou'n i:hern all' 'fhere is a question r1-corrslr'ur:tion ancl interprelati,n oJ.the effect of the deed fi'om the Jessups to tlie lr.lfbrcls that is sr-rit'ble J'or delerrnination by tirir; court. I)laintiffs t'equest that the crlurr ju'Jicialll'fincl arLd declare, ii.they a.e not r:'titled to refbrmatjon o.[the deed, that Plaintiffs owrL one-half oIall t'he trLi'erals whir:h Jack perslLjngJessup owneclat the tirne of the deed.

Page 8 Alford v McKeithen, ct aJ 3d Antnci Petn

lJ.

r !' o Ac RElll*? #T$3 t;,iu+,?iJ i i ff,l'''), x,B u,, o u,,, u,, The only reseLvaLtion of rnirLerals contai'ed in tho deed fir'r 1:he Jessups to lrlai'tifft refer.recl to reser'ing one-Jlalf of'all r'inerai rig3hts "wh.ich rnay be'n or unrler the above ciescritrerl tract ol, land'" The "abo'e desc:ribecllra.t of [a'd" wiis what was iclerLtifiecl ,,,fract as c,ne,,,consistirg o1, 1 17'5 acres' Tract Two' consist'ing of two acl'erl, morc o'rt:ss, ftrlrorareci trrat staternent a'd not be considered to L,e: the ,,above 'ould described tract,,, .i.hercfore, tht:r,:

is no construction of the dr:ecl itself.

that reserves to the Jessttps the rninerals in and uncler ther t,rro-acr.e [ri]ct, ,,Tract Two.,, NOnetheless.

the Jessups enter€jd itlto an oil and Gas Lea.se rvith ce:ntral f'oxas Land serviccs oll or about March 12'2008' flor a term of tht'e'e (!i) years. sirrct,: the.ressuPs had reserved any,ij, gas, or 'ot other minerals in rand under thal trvo_ar;te tract. anct a lifr: r:state ijivcrs lher life tenrurt r:ro authority or powel'to lease the minerals witlior'rr joi'cler of the re'raincrer'iarr (plaintifft did not join), ancl since the deed should be relbrtned clue to mulual nrir;take. that oir, ceLs, a'cl Minerar Lease has rio effbct on the rights of Plaintiff's other lhiltr to cloud this trtlc ro th'nr: r.i'erals. plaintifl.reques;ts that the court judicially fincl ancldeclare that they are, and h've been at all iimes since A.pril 25,2003,the owners of all right' titlr: lrnd otvlrel'ship i'terest in oii. gas, ancr otrrer rninerals the Jei;sups may rrave owned in and unde'the two-ac'e ;:ract iclentilrercl ar; .",fr.acr fvr,o,, in the creed.

CLAIM A GIi IN S'I' RO B ]rI'T1i TFIOIViA I' ]\4 [] I( Ei 1.Fi]]]\ B)' T]il"iSPAS;S t.o l.R Y. TI t.r-,8 Plainrifi's IrcinB suit aga.Lnst Defundant l'ho'ras ll'ber.t Nlcl(erthen, in tht: alterntrtive, by a trespass to try titli: action. They show that thei, wcre at ali tim,:s ;laterial to this suit, and are, the

Page 9 Alfot'd v Nlci(erthen. et al 3d Amnd petn ownel's in fee sirnple of three trac;ts.f lanc1 located in san Aur6r,ustine county,.fexas, said tracts described more f'llv in Exhibit A;rttar:hectto this pleadi'11, a'cJ ail improvernentr; thereon, togetlier with all the ownership irLterest in al t oil, gas ancl other mi;re:ra.ls rvhicrr tJreir grantor.s, J ach Jessup and Annie Elizabeth Jessup' owne:cj in and under sai.ltracts.

orr.ruJy I:1,20i0, plai'tirT,rwel,e, and st'l are' legally entitled to possessiou of the t.acts described irr E>:rribit A. on tirat date, Defendant Mcl(eithen wronglluliy entereclupotr the subjectprolre'ties,ncr nru, cr)nrinues to wrthfrold lrossession from Plaintiffs from all or part a 01the premises.

Defendant McI(eithen has ust:d and .ccuiriecl the tra'ts of iarrd describecl i' Exhibit A attached since July 13 ' 2010' Durirrg that time perjod he has i'er:eivcd cornpe'sation fbr Jeasing the oil' gas' and other miuet'als itr ;Lncl under those trac;ts, has exe,r.{,isecl control over thcrse i'tr:rests by conveying the right to tline' clrilt and oilrerwise exploit a'clrern'r,e trrose interests, ancr has r:eseived royalties fiom De:lbnclant Eo(:i for the sale ancl rernovar of gas ancr otrrer oir, gas, 'arural and minerals in and u'nder one or more o1'those tr.cts, 1-rro'rarue oiliis use and o'cupancy of those tracts' and the value of the ojl, gras' and oth'r nrine'als removt:<I, is wirhin tJre subjr:ct matter jr"rrisdiction and jr-u'isdicr,ionar rr)on(rtary lirnits of this c.urt.

Despite notice by Plaintiifs of their claim of ownership ri'cl c:xcrusive righr to possession of the tracts in questio'Dr:fendant ltcl(eithe'has failed t. vacrite the premises. pr,.intirfs;

shourd recover judgment that the Plaintiffs'

cl'iur olo','rne.ship in arLrJ 1' trur minerar interests rn arLd under the tracts in question as supe'ior.to thar of Det,;'dant i\4cl(eitrrt:n

Page I 0 Alfbid v NlcKeithen, et al 3d Amnd pctn cl,.a,rM,.\ GA'\ s f 9g1r1u,!'ril r.f L,o G F oR. lt Eivio o]r oII_, GAS vAL oR o.fftui lv4ll,,rr)R,,\i,s Piaintiffs' upon learninl1 that '[)efendartt ]lo(i was possibt.y tar<ing a positio' thar l,raintifls did not own the oil' gas'

and oflier minerals in and u'dt:r'lhe tra.cts of la'd crescribeclin Exhibit gave direct' specilic A, notice to agents o'empl,rye*s of r,()G of tiLeir crairri of o.wnr:rship of those interests' Despiteractual notjr:r: of Plaintilrs'

.lainrs, ancl eve'iiliei: assuring plai'tiffs thal no oii, gas or other miner.als woulcl be tal<en and renrovr:d fi.m 1,he iracts i' quei;tion r,rnti]

trre issue of.

ownership was legaliy rtls.ive'cl'

EoG nonetheiess w{,t orto the prt,rmises and comnrenced drilling activities' completecl a lvell'

iinclheLs since re'rove'.r <;ir, ;;,s, ancr otrrer irrinerars rvitrrout prai'tifrs, consent' Plaintiff's 1l'in13 suit atrlainst l)efendart Er.)(.i frrr the firir *arket varue of the oir, gas, and mineral products removed by J:ioci frtrn the tractr;

ir gr-r<:stior wit]rout any redtrction f<;r costs of production' Plaintiffs f'rthe'sfro\^'that they erter'0d in1.o a leas;e agreement thenrserves with IroG a'd that under the ierms of that lease agreeme't E(.)(i is; obrigate<J to corripensatrj them for an;, sjl, gas' and other mirte.als it renloves, that EoG has lailed a'rl .e,ils;r:c1 to compensate thenr fbr those removed products' thaL such faiiure a't1r:e1usal is a b.ear;rr of between praintilTs and 'orrtraot EoG,

c LAIN4 r . ci. DE{-'-L.rnqlf;xr )1 r:u:: LIE F A'AI}JS :f Ir EfrEl.iD,,\N.t EC G It.E L O L,r i{c llti, I5t C,

Defendant lloG R'esout't:es, lnc., entere(l into rirL (-)i;, cas, zr'cr Mi'eral Lear;e agreement with Defendant McKeithe'" ivhich pul'po'.s to lease' to it aril tru: oir" gai; other mirLerals which were owned by the Jessr:ps in 'nd a'd urtcler the I 1 7 .5 a,','etrircr.

iclt:ntiflecr in the deed ,,Tract o'e.,, praintilft contend that as a result.f mutuzLl nristake the \,vai';:arLty Deecr v,,itrr 've'clor,s I-ie' e:recnte<i by tire

Page I I Alfold v McKeithen, et al :d Amnd Pern

Jesslips does not reflect the true aSreeinent of rhe lrarties a-rrd shor-Llrj be refbrmecl to sho,w that they acquired all mine'a1 inlerest in thr: 117'5 ac,rotrar;t which the Jessulrs ownecl. r' such an event,, Defbndant EoG has not deah'

with the true owrler'f rhe mi'e'ars i' and under th'r tr.act t)y entering into a lease with r)efbndant McKeithen. Plaintifls Set:i< a clecl;Lr,atorl,juclgment th;rt t)efbndant EoG has no varid lease: agreernent as to those minerals.

In the alternativi:, should the Clourt fai, to;:eJbnn llLe rir;ed ;rs requested, but judicially find and deciare that the plaintifft;

are the clwners cf one-harf ,1'the oil, gas, and other miner,als owned by the Jessups at the time of the exei;ution of thr.: 'wa*ilLtSr l-1,,,-.1 wilh Ve'd'r,s Lie.n to them, Plaintilfs seek a declara'ory juclgnient that (i) they are trre ou,n<:rs of'one-half of ali the ortr, gas, and other minerals in iind uuder the I 17.5 acre tract whjch the .ressulrs orv'ed as of the:

cjate of.trrat deed, and (2) that the lease between Defe:nda't lloG ancl 1-)efr:'cra.rLt McI{,eiihen does no1. ;L1 ct thrli11io1rr, as the ownel.s of one_haif of those minerals.

CLAIM FI]R A'IO-RN]EY'S FI]ES U]VDfiR ,'F{E DI]CLARATCRY J LTDGMENT A.CT AGAIN S"I TIT.,iIEIU;rIr]rJT EOG

Plaintiffs zLre parties int*res1'ed under a <leecl, r,vrit.te' contracl, or orher writinS; whcs;e rights, status' or other leg'al relations afe affect.ed by a r:on1.r'ac1 .r iease between Defenda't A4cKr;ithen a'd Defendant EoG' 1'he1' 5eeL eL cletetmitiatio' o1'their Lightr; 1.o trre oii, g's a.cr other.nriner:ars in a'd under the 117 '5 a<:t'e tra<:t they acquired ll'o'r the Jessutrrs. piairLtiffb should be au,arded costs and reasonable and necesseir'/ alf6111gy's fet:s h'om i)efe:nt.tant l::(l(.] urnrJr,:r $ 37.00g o1.tht,: T,B.x,ts ctvtt_ PRacrrcp & Rptra:otes (loDE.

Page 12 Alfold v Mcl(eithen. ct al 3d Amnd petn cli:tM F oR A'rc GMEN'I AC "f a c a'rii T-r$ .rrJ: Lr.r Di:R .

JUD i'r r E DEc r-A R A.ro*.r i'Er-prur,ai r"crx'n ri *a o r- ii,ur, ririRvrcE s s'

Plaintiffs arepallies interes;ted under a deer:I. writt*ri corltrac{, or other writrng whose rig}rts, status' or other le1;al relations;

are affected by a coniract rr.rease rretr;,reen Defbnda.nt ]\4cl(.eirhen and DefendantcentralT'e>iasLa'dile.vice's'

I'heyseer<.acleterrninal.ionofttteir.rightr;toiire,ii,gasa'd other minerals in and u'der rhe: two acr.e tract rhey acquiri:cl Ii..' tlre Jessups. plai'tiffs shoulcl be awarded costs and reasonable and nec,:ssary altorr,ey,s fe(Jsi ag,irLst Defenda't Central J,eras X.and services under 37.00g $ of t'e 'rrxas crrvir_ pnec.rrc. & Iiir,iraEor'ri;coo..

19, ATTORNE 'S F'EI]S Plai'tiffs te:coverl'of'arld fi'om rseeh thr; clefbndantr; for reas.nab[e and rrecessary attorney,s fees for breach of conlract'

urtcler the tleclaratory J udgmerts Ao1:, and by way ol.treslLass t' try titre.

WHEREFORE, plaintil.ls requesi that Lhe rjet.endanrs br: ci1c,d to appear and ansvyerr herein, and that upon final heari;rg the (lo'r't fi'd that the v,'arranty I)eerl vr,itri venclor,s Lien ciate,J Aprii 2..5, 2003, between Jack Jcsrsup and w,ife.,A,mrie EtizaberfL Jes;sup, ancl i.lharles Alfor.cJ and lvift, Mury Lou Alford, be refor.med to reflr;ct tjte tr.uc agre(jnlent beiweern tht:

lraities that no rLinerraI res;ervation as to Tract one oc'c:url'ecL;

thal 'itt th': alLernative," if ,:efo'n;Ltiorr 'f instrument rs not gi:anted, the trrr.:

court judicially fi'c1 a'cl declare uttdet: the Te>ias J)ec1ara1.'r;, .fudgrnenrs Act th,t unde' the tenns of that deed Plaintifl's a<:quirecj oner-half of all owrLersrrip riglrtrs of'rhe Jessups t. arLy oil, gas, and nrinet'als in and ttncler rhe tt'iici of I1'7.5 acrr:s dr:scribec iri trriit deecr;

that rhe.our-r find and ;udicially declare r:hat there was no reservation ,rf ary oir, p,as, arul minerars in and un.er those 'trLer

Page 13 Alfold v McKeithen. et al 3d Amnd iretn tracts of land identified as '1rac1s Tu'o ancl Three in the vrarranty r)cred witrr r,/encror,s Lie,; that thr:

court issue a mandatory injunctio'ordering, Defe'dant \,4cl(eitherrr io execute anil deliver a lLeleasr:

of Liens on the propr:rly conveyed to the plaintiffs or, in tJre alternative, the court fi'd and ju.icialry declare in its judgnrent that thosie liens have been satisf iecl in lull and are deciared released ancl authorize Plaintifl's 1o record thc judgment in the ofllcial llublic R.e<:orr]s of sian r\r-igr_rstirre county, Texas; that the cou't order Plaintiffls' title and ownershiP inlerest irr the oii, gas arrd other.minerarr;

in and under the tracts in question superior to that of De:fi,,nclant vicl(eithen;

thar l,laintiffi; recover.

all costs and reasona'ble and necessary at'rorney's fees against all rJejenda'ts;that t,laintifft recovel.

all costs of this proceeding; ancl that Plaintilrs recover such other i:eiiefl whether in law or in equitv as they may be entitJed to receirrer.

J:i.especrfuJly :;u bry i rrecl.

'' i"

:,

-r-onr -"i' ' "" -:j':r--.-

R6rie'

Iirare Bar lJo. 1 723 9000 210 Norrh Street ),iacog<ioches.

TX 1596l (e36) 559_1 188 rrA)( (936) 559_0099 A'{"[O]tiN Oy ]'OI( p[,A.trNT,lt]!,]lS

EIJUUIQAIE-OI I s [: ttv ICF

clocumr:nt hiis l,een served o'

au;'l}9.t1ffi::t1;1f;lt]**"ing opposirLg counser this

i'age 1,1 Alford v N4cl(eithen. et al 3d Amnd Petn

Mr. Jason R. Mills Mr, Graham I(. Simrns Mr. Jeff I(, t{eck Freeman Mills pC 1i0 N. Collt:ge, Suite 1400 Tyler, TXI:t702

Mr, Noel D. Cooper Law Offices o1.Noel D, Cooper 117 North Street, Suite 2 Nacogdoches, TX 7596l

Mr, Bill Mc'Whorter Bill McWhofier & Associatt:.,; 1 19 North Srreet, Suite A. Nacogdoches, fX 7 5961.5200

| .. :.1

l-orn ltorie

rage I ) Alford v \,lcKeithen, er al 3d Amnd Petn i,,'L*l",.suf,, f i;

!,ft;;:11,, s,lH aue ur,,rii"cil ZI;-;.---:' .:-r,:<lJ_ r i,*<i0S

fuii*r fl

l41Es,it=qY.-_D3QJ-.,&J&:..{iEry j.e5$.ul.9g u, d):jlt D'11e';;._ ==ftiiiii?

trst€i April ?,s,2a03 {lrqnto}i JA()l{.p Jl 4i!D wFij'

n'NNI-t ):i:, ur6slerru *'or,* naut'tt E'srJr, r,<rieoa (JLrcludlrrg Lranre0r erl,urljjs ,.r, ;;, ;;u^':rT' r\ttgutlit.tr''

/rir' tt"t sr'ti r\11s14nre 6rB'?eels rr*,,u,,, ;u,*l,";;lrrrllr "t a0u'1y T,r'es 7se72 ou'l't"nR'i)

.relr (lacltrdlafg conBlrleration; colrili]); l'i.lttc l' iJox ')2g, tian Ar.rg1l.5i,!1c, srrr ".\,11gorr1,r" r-o\\tty,T.,x;\Q,/sg.)2

,Ji:,riri)^r;[],:,i]:;;f od ruc,vairLerie i.beide,aro,r ff., ]i:i:':'fi"il?ffiil,i;rjf io (;i,,,rorpaio,ens),

fr;*ffi"f""irff.rit,;".'.r*iirriff,;:r.j,,1i;r,-::,s,,:i,r;l:ifr;*iilx,jro"*i**,*,", ;:,:ili[r#:i*jii- :l,tqi;3,]. :r,ril.r,iilr;,rii;ir- 1,,:,r,,r:,u*T 1.1,, r #ii;#3;k;.:h;,1;i;;1,..1'l;;ll::.:"+i., _t,:,,lt,: A, .,,

Tl,4g 1 ,1 i276, -- " :i; ;,,,;i1i$*!ti,,,l;j;;;;

"6 ))Jor J Il tr:lr.rxi) Arrr ,'

;, :r1:;*1 jr;

rr',, ff ,t,t; :,ll*;l:J,, .",",

St-t.u:t,,o,d:,;;,;i:i;:i;i-li;;';;"i"1:',i.',,,,,,if.;;,;,,,;,,r,u,.,, :irii::l*,}i,:{i;ii;:i:ll;l :l,l -;

;#.i,',,,,,,:;.;:',li ,;j: ;i,"li,?,jJ:lt'l *1L,,;;;;

:10:r' i'i;" 1Y;';;l;jt'i'l :i$i,l?itilo,b.,p ;;;:,,1,f''},::,i, ";;;,'1,, rJ".,:"^' J, Lcr'r J€c,,, ),:

',"t.'"^'."1i5"'i"'il"?'l';

;Yiil+rritJtil*d;*i;ffi;;,iiil"'ffiJi#:';li'r:;:r;:r;';:3'l?:rlir'iill';::"r'i;l ff;;?llJ,",ib,lJl;illj,l : I,td u,.,,,,, ,r,'r*l;..%11il#f; f Jfiifl t*.tilJffi .,*,*.*;Hffi =ft#;

.,fr c 6"; ::

.*it;;,ljl,1..iili:';:,-:'

;l#' ::Ii;';;

,fiXlll 3i1;3:)'j..i:, ;.1'; l :''* ll' ;;"" n.'l', #Hjf :"p;:,*:$;[ r r iC..i:i r, l:ii-** :

r,**iI, ",,,.,.,. ;f :$l.iii, r ".rcor . ii. ,, ,.,",iriu,",yi 'fi'#illi;;;:i;i]?,ffil!i::ffili*:,i.r:i:r;.ci,r:rry " ^ s;1 r{,i.],i,c(.i o,r,i e*el, uoi, iius;;ir1p..

tnn*l'n'.'*'ul.Juliui*r'rr'rru' i.s rLrLry pnil ac.'r(rhs rrrd p-i,r)o\Llrr io n*.t r;:crud; rrc

,##,yfx# ,-lt _ 'rrr.rir,.

(y,;,?=z<t(<!.;:tr..,, <.{,,,1i{r|(,,t*,;*riii#6 *#nr?r.,,/r*ro,,;1,t.)

/r

t.:Xi l[:li /1,

'.! t,i:

' ''"'"';:&t:J=pjr;

ffi*l*f*fi{lf lrii; i-r:firy,,* '

":li:l 6g*g##*{r;;tid;;H#$,, trfrtr{1ff*irr t1$'iif :rffi;1,ii''fifi*i:}; * r,,,,

,

#ffi'ffi**ff i;nK{*_:cut*- j ''"0, ,u,,0u,,', , ,. -

r..., ,r ,: .,,1u ;1.,,,i\!€(i i f,ci'{rn i?F.rr :;",;,.,'|i,iI,,,,,...

;:.:o '

o /r'l Jl :\d i i";.:;-iil, i"li'l; ,".., 0.,"* j,,ii 'rc'l b€lni. J \ .r )'-riy '

i enc e71v5:t,:";, t,:',:"';;'::,,.:;;:.

il'::'^0""r!

ttt o:d r ot.rcr :"',:,':nii: gar r*rqi, duguBti.e Daa"

' lr '''r ' c ,,,r,'.uoui , ,t . . 'o,,t) ..0,.uc'ir't^'u o*,,"u,.,j,yl o...,,.,, e" ^:

.

";.,,,rt',I,,,,,,,',eco)(:.((1 ... 1,

e.ird, a:rd ?hue ,r,,:"r;:;: ;.-;, 3l)GIliNr;fii,,. ar . j 11 r( .:6._r, .:":'- -n u, ,o, *'

"'"1::-:t '',u',, :.;;',,;;,,;':,-Irij! o:' n{1-r(r r,r soi1.,.

lli ^ r::,,

'.'",,;,i oi ries',,"'

'il#il:::H "' "',, ;,,.'* iii' e r ;;^:i.r 'li,i,'i;,j'i::,' :l ttt t=lti TBE*'I ]i():.ih trgr(r4 io ,,,r0 riet\e i.ii i.i "'''.

,0

a4 onr"i,, jltr-titrJ' :iOO f i; i rt r, ji trEiiNc)t rir.; .n* ,"., irl

.ro'ialrixr€ ,r.i.6hi ..!-' ,"u'' r,...r):)ro:

'- '':" :ni l,B!

,, *"uu"*',l.I"t'o a;reo".L,1r:;;;

-';;l;i":,",'-:n:'.::: ;,,;',"", il

liXf.lI;3;,,. ,r

I

jti:,,rsj,!,il,F;;:il;- ootrhiTy ol s"r,l'l,"fiu sri;u

AITBR 8(:oPoi;:i;:i') 2' I s2 ;;^;' :3 ::1"y"

I t s e' i''

:1 ;il' o \ a 4 "

"'t ili,,- i ru,afi ;;11;-;. ]: ]t' j-.1 ; i # 1,,'*,,,,,u u',, y ;

;;;];

"*,"'

1 ]' i:; A,r, ro Rr I ;

'-, --a !-l

NC, cv-12-9344.

CHARLIIS and MA.RY LOU ALFORD, plaintiff's $ IX TI-IE DISTR]CT COUR f

VS.

ROBERT THOMAS Mct(EI I,F{EN"

oir EOG RESOURCES, INC." arrd CENTRAL TEXAS LAND t;I]J?VICFS DefenclarL.is SAN AIJC|USTiNE COLTN f Y, TEXAS

PLATNTIEES: ruts:Is Up BI,rlME NSt aL nEluTrcN ,)

TO THE HONORABLI] JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

CHARLES IIARY I-ou AL FORD, Piaintiffs 'nd in lhe rLtrove e'titlecl ancr nur:nbered cause"

file this First Supplemental petition and show:

1.

The warranty Dr:ecldi'rted April 25.2003,from p. liessup Jacl< an<l Annie Eii:,rabetli Jessup to Piaintiffs is arnbiguous i'that there is a co'flict between the re'ns of the cleed itsell.in which the deed omits any mention of a reser'ation of minerals anclthe aftachcd Exhibit,,A,,which states i' the propefiy description that one-htrif of ther minerals are retaiued by (irattrxs. The clr,:ed is further ambiguous for the reasoll that Jack P, Jessup and Arurie Elizatrelh Jt:ssup are identifii:d i;ir the cleed itself as "Grantor" while the attached Exhibit "A" ref'ers to thos;e parties who ari: reser,,rinrl minerals o'Grantors." as

wHEREFrol{E' Plainrifls request that the court file this; Fitst Supplenrentar petition ,,vith Plaintiffs' originai Petition and that PlaintifTs be au,arclecl the relief requested in ptaintiffs, original

Page I Alford v NlcKeithen et al l" Supp Petn

Petition' as well as such other:

and further relief to which plai'tiffs may tre justly entitle.,

Respecrtful Iy sut,milted,

.), t'-:r''

;----::-i-l"n ---z''' r..----- r otl] 1(otle,

State llar l,Jo. 1?23g000 210 lrlorth Streel Nacogdoches" TX 75961 (e36) ss9.. I 188 FAX (936) 559-009v ATT'OI{.hIEY F'OIi I'LAtrF.ITI]CFS

i::)r;l! u!,':?1,,1?:;r?:1":,lll: t*t"ing document has br:en se,rved'n oppc,sinpl cc,unser this

Mr.l'ioel D. Cooper l,aw Ofhces of l{oel D. Oooper F ar;similt: (936)'l I S -602,2

Mr. Ilill lVcWhorter Flill McV/hofier &. Associates F'ar:similr: (93 (,) :.t 64 -6 4 S s

Mr. Jason R. Mills l\4r, Graham l(. !iirnms F'reernan Mills pC Faosimile: (903) :jg2-7t Bl

Page 2 Alford v McKeithen ct al 1" Supp Petn

NO. CV_12.9344

CHARLES and MARY LOIJ Ar-FORD. s N I'F] I i DISTzuC'f C]OUR'I Plaintiffs

VS.

OF ROBERT THOt\4Au MoI(EI,fi IEN. IOG RESOURT]llS. NC., arr..l CENTRAL TEXAS I,AND SIiIiVICEiS Defbnclanls SAlrl r\ LIC}TJSTINB COUNI.fy, -fEXz\Si

VIOTION Ii(:)R. COLTR.T TO CONSTR[]II DOCUMEN-I' PTUOR TO F]VIIDE,NCE SLT]}MISSI*N OF IS'SUES ^ND I_Q_.ruRY-I]LT&I_ILL, ti

TO THE HONC)RABLtiJUIJctl OF SAID COU|TT:

NOV/ COMII, C{IAR|_F,S ALFORD and MAlty t.Oi,] ALFORD, hereinafter referred to rLs

"Plaintiffs"' and move the cor't to construe as a matte' of lau, the warra'ty Deecl fi.om ,Jacl.r

Jessup and lrnnie Eljzabeth Jessup to Charles Allbrd and '.

1\4ary Lou Alforcldatecl Aprit 2li.2003" in and support thereof show as fbllows:

1.

coni;truction of eL doctttnent is a rnatter of law fbr the e ourt.

Milner v. l,:[ilner,351 s.w.3ci 615 (Tex' 201 1) whr:ther or not a document is ambiguous is to be deterrnini:cr- as a nratler of l.vr.

A ruling by the t'ial.iurlgr: as to a propef construction o1'rhe dt:ecl in guestion in this suit is necessary to determine the s<:ollerol'the i:r'iclence and the issues rhat are:to be submitted to the jr'.y chosen in this case.

Page 1

Alfold v NlcKeirhen Mtn Construe Docum,;nt

2.

Plaintif{'s hav<: allegecl the cleed is ambiguous by thei. slupplement*l pleading,fAmbiguity.

DefendantIIOC has pLead ambigluity in its,,EOG .l.rlxas,s anci Central Response to plaintiffs, Motion for Summary Judgrnenl'" Defendant Mcl(eitlien iras plea<l ambigr.rity in his,,Defc'clant Robert Thomas McKeithen's; llespottl;e to Plairrtitfs'

Motion for.sunrniary Judgmerlt,,, A court may find an agreement anrbiguous even if'the parties have not raisecl thal is;sne. Milner v. l4ilner,36l s. \ /.3d 615,619 (Tex' .201)); May t,, Buc/r,375 s.w.3c1 56g (Tor.rrpp,-Da'as 2012,Jr.

wrir hisl.).

3.

A copy of'the deed to be construed is attachecl to tlLiri .i.he rnotion as llxhibit 1. marr:rial provisions of the deed to be construed by rhe court are the rolrowing:

(1) lihe.tessups are iclentihed as ,,Gl.antor,,in 1.he, Wrtrranty Dr:ecl itsetf. Lr the attached

Exhibit"A"thedescripl-ionfot'"Tract 1,"inwl'iicliareservationofmineralsisineluded,refersto

"Grantors'" Tht:refcrre. the de:ecl is ambiguor"rs in that the ltarly identifiecl in t6c deecl itseil,may not be the same par-iies identified in the property clescriptior;

(2) l'he deed itscll'" i' tlte sectio' enlitle<l "i{.eservarions lrom conveyance and wananty"' expl'erlsly retains 1'or Grantors a life estate. but makes no mention of a reser'atio' of minerals' while lihe descliptioir for "'l'racl.

i " attached to the dr:eci refers to a reservations of nrinerals;

therefore' tire dr:ed is arnbiguoi-Ls as to the i'te't of rhe partir:s as to whr:ther the Jessupsr res0rve minerals;

(3) 'l'he rJe,ed itself only ini:orporates b1, its langui4;,; the attar;he<j E>lhibit,,A,,for the express puryose of providi'g a description of the property; there,fbre, any la'guatr;e in thar der;cription

Page 2 Alford v McKeithen Mtn Constrire Document that refers to a rese|v:Ltion of rrtinet'als is surplusage ancl slioulci lle clisrega.rded by the cour1. In this regard Plaintiffl; rel'y on the authorities and argument coniainr:<l in trlaintiffs, Motion for.Sumrnary Judgment' The c'utl should <:ottstrue the documert ard makc a finding on the record .r.whether the ianguage in ExtLibit "A" that nLetttions a minerai reservatirn is, a.s a matter.of law, i'c'.porateri i'to the deed itseif.

tl.

Plaintifl's l'eque:it that' befol'e the ope'ing stateme'ts rry couns;el arr<i the ad'-iissio' o1.

evidence in the case'' the couficonslrue the deecl and attachri-rert as a matter of law ard put o' the record of the case its constri:r:lion ancl ruling.

WHERIIF'ORE' Plaintifl's request that the court oonrstrue the warranty Deecr i' question in this suit as a ma.tter o [ l.w ancl pr-rt its ruling on the recorcr or. ihr; case.

Fi.el;1tectfu11y suLirnitted,

t'

-i )' , '----.^---.a ':r1 !...- . .-...- 'l'ont Iiorie ^-'

Stare lJar No. 172.3g000 21Ct lrloth Streel ltiacogrlochei;, TK I 5q61 (e36) sse.t 188 FAK (936) ss9_00e9 hll'lt'Oll.NIEy FOR I,LAINT]IFF,S

_i. LRl'lEl cA] € ol:lJ:ir !"ljll:,

documenr hzLs t,ee'served',r e4i";'Xl1,jl?ljo!'ii1"ll,1f.''"t"ing c,pp.sin51 cc,unser this

Page 3 AIfbrd v Mcl(eithen Mtn Construe Docunrcrrt

lVr. Noel D. Oooper li-aw OfTices of l\oel I). Cooper Fa.csirnile (93 6) 7 I 5 -60,22

lVr. Bill McWhorter i3ill V,fcWhorter & Associates llacsimile (936) 564-64 S S

lUr. ,lason R. l\{ills lWr. Graham I/"" Simnis Freeman Mills FrC lracsinrile (90 l) Sq2-7 7 S7

t:

-.*-..---,..-. .;i ,:,:-;,-. r' _ :t ;.i r.;.. '}'om liorie

Pagc 4 Alford v McKeithcn Mtn Construe Docun.rent r,rrr "'7'{J: -,r xo4.,J*-.:li::'( ;t * _*. - .,

I

jif:ff " lt':it !t,,r, :F;'as ;

"

0tAri1 cotrt$r cteRi< 119yn,,, sAn AU(;|51ti\ .tEXA!;

E co.,

l{4IBAry{C_0,ru9g@y&llrlQti1.!.iyLf , , rtr ): 4/"tutl/r*1 . ._ sii,:y,,J rity

Ilate: Ap:ril tZS, 2003

Granto* iAO[t.p JESSii?

l\l!I:) Wijjg, AtqNnl It) ,tZ6Bliyt1 j1.irrtJ})

GrBIltor'6 jVJslllx0 ,,\rldrcas (ltitlludlng eounry)l F.0ute J, Aox 484, gan rrr gtl8l)-ir_1r, (;rBntce: 1 $i a:r AU gurJ til].9 C t rntty, O:{AIU"ES ALFOI|JJ L, ex a s, / li 9 "l ).

/ri,t{) WIIE, l,4Al(y LOU AL}rOIt)

Grattec,s IVJnlilng /r,tld',cl:

(lnrrhirliiig courrtv)l ll,olrie l, Fox 529, (jonclder{.rtloil: Sau r\iltirrstjr:c, ,,(.:, }rrr]

Srru Ar Aupu€jlitre C,:uunz, I.ex rg :,9i2 H,,d"r.-'#l*T"l:il#ff,il:iiXil;'lJ;H$lJlll;g?r,.Hff'1:,uffid rrrrl varurbrc .ons,e,cratiorul ro crailro:,paicl, cn;h

[*il"[fi,,ffi:if;#l[:$ ,;'i'H:#{1,\::,",t',i,,".:',1"ii:';::,*ii,i,::::l:ij1fi:iin"H,;ililT *o],:t,,o,"",", arr:/ !nrprov'';raetut,,)

fff:'FJli$l''Ir{s i

3flT#li1rTff;:i jf ,j;i1,r ",,.r.iur,, ru bu,, su.

"Tj, it,yiJtr;$l'iiilll :ttrfiil*:d.ffi ilf*i+,iil:l*. #i*rf TRASI ,py6,.

=x$ii*

ffiH#+*l{iilrltt$,nfii:[*# ti*H: ii#i,'l.lr,,iiit;;"1;;;ilili',,*rrriii]"l,i;-],1,;,,,i;,1il; ffiiffs fiilil:ffij,.,j;':!il,u,:.,;rJr;,rii;*,t,Lt?iii**ijdi;;:;r ::j:;':,i,,,;,r;r;l1.,il"Jr;:,,i jr::

rRACT TltRIi[r BEING rl} of (:rrft,tord (, ark 1:

:::tiff;,$.ltj;$*fi**ifi.fltdjili{ij*f*ny",gi1tnij"r,j,i,lfjii;i].1,':;,*?:,,l;ff,,r:,il:,Tiji]l

fflilH:;'fJ'dx;i;lllll:[i;:iil.I.?,;Tlll;, ,L Jipu,sc ,,on, i,, ocn:

'_l;,;H.H;,Tj"-,,r1e,f;iil,, o,rc, u:;u of

3,'#i#;;[:i];j;i#':;,1'lu ')'/r'f , irr $' ;'i'" ' ':L:-

(x - ' (\'"Qr' ' {"'1i'

Hfr#*ffiffiil';[ ;T,,?'J;:1Hrlij,,i.y*ir,y]ii,i#,i,i:ffffJi,xl;H,jr,::ii:Iy,rrr*mts;,fj;Ji,,,1",,.,rriijr

rrill;ju*:fi ffid#iit',:q'Ii-.fi**ti* rii, #H:'1fu;pr;,;{i ,'Ti.#,, : ffi$:ii$p;;;*:;*iir;:i*iriiriinlrH,;#:l,p';*-t::li$l**iiil fJlHi'*{>du:lrfi'#t:nihl,XiXerrv 'ftlffi;*:i arc rutriued unrir enci'ote cieo.*ibeti is 6Lly pniriar:eorrii'g rc, cont€xftsquil.f 0, oil,gr{rit. lou:u *r, anrl pronouos rnelucJc ffifU, tirc plurni, :^-i,:,,,;))

#"mg,* /: ))

irXf f itll'l

I

1,.__-.--.

lUl;, llTAl Ii Otr :|EXAS (l0t.n'l'rv rJIr SAI.1 A:ijjUSTtNE

. . l'tus i.n,tlulniirrl \!.ttg tti or( lus 1:efbre rnc by JACI( Ltu ,zJrh rlay or .c pil, zOditotuleclgi:d P \vl$E, AIiNIE ELIZAIjEITI J'.L,SSul)

'l r:xr"s 7 59'12.

/!rr:'*- R:N:ioRr:,rrri,r+li,l"iifsi,''il;;.Jiil !i;ri ?#rtii;,,r(Er.no1f, A,r"f()rl.r'y

1'"-1r-i /') cr

( , \-)\-J .I

-'1, '11;$i[-J;)tii,I i' '-

,;;*ll,il-;;,1;;,li;il-riill*,;:rr,ir[;ii'l;i*r;,i:;ii']rr;;;iF[ ,fli;iii,;:.:' $ffi-,,:;xil,i1:l*Fdim-.::1i:::;;l;ii;;f'ili*;:;;*ii::;,;*n'il'$:-ffi:'::'-

irt llilil{;;i+lrl+l;i*l;,;l llmi ii; +l'ri,',i$ri,i: i:[;il'n,,*],r;,, -'',fi;$i;ii,;ili,;il;iirt:;i;-illfiTiiiillili:'i,fi:u:ti#r.rHrr*"iil'i.iirl;;ij Bu v : e *ffi,f,,m* xqq;;re;;:il:[r:;,ffi*tri,;ffiff y: H;iii' $'"fi1:i3 l,;;u ;;.,: t";iq*k,f .i,;'r*l,Ir:ni:i $il,,-;,,i,,,r'tir;;ii*"h.,l*ir,dirn',,,"

J{I;tii,,'$'ji:irllfl.f#ili;*.r'l*lqi;*l'r'r-fft'qll;':lsff:*^"li.flls Tt',fiji;"r;-:rrtr;-;;;, -iiifi.,rlr,r^il;;;;ii*ili;rl*;*"r,,,, H;s;r; ij i,,ru,,ro,*flr:r, xc ;;fl,'!l':,;:t;;:,,i:;;ll,l,u,l;tl"tjiijr;;:":5'l?"iifiliru':.1,*ll"f*:;?;,,,;;r,., ;;,o.,llll" _:r

"" ' fi-i-.:-*-',:1:\:r::

^ft txt"'*,, ". '-'i - ,-

, r 7r o i'

- -

-.:::g t'

t:('Ef:t, l.or c,.r p.t,r"eri.

or l.q4d, :., ar I :::-t :tt't'"t)x ,:1.rua.irad i ^ 6^. , t)re 0sq116 ie'',',l:p,',,;i;; beir:p; ou 'ii 0eq1v1'' ?"xa€,, il;:;:: ::JT:;, -ll-,'i';,.,.";";;.;;-;ilti:'e';

*::_:"::j"ll il,,,,:'; 'il: ,,;;:;

::i.;:,;: ;.":f , I !t'eq na( o'c16 o{'ci!'u A.u$uEtrJ.n.

ll,:.;e":il"J::ll":',,:::.,::"::;

fu vo.l.uos 92, }, lrl)

[ cr,]rr1b,r'r a6ys.s. h^r". kao!/d 3r'Dcj'n{J ,:^l.st'!:orosrl of i;Lle lrudr r)nd t)).urs dss{lr:rt,od., ss{]rlt,od, Es r'l:;

lof I ts:r1()lt{}l:N(i r:

t\ )){. r r.* J )r iL{. ,IL-

- ." fi *" o.l ""';l;J; d'$ )las'| 240 rec'b r'.rr $h€ ;lll:,':,":,;: ;:";;": ,;,;.i'1 f :;::,.'iill':;;:T:: crrer\'

;:a,o ,,8r, ;;l;1,::i:";;I:i :::l';x;":l]ckv i I ;il]il:l -'' i,i, r! tr!u Bi:€ires ro il-I24':)-,/21 dsr'1. 'fie€t urD rL()8' i/")

i)arer.ral ,,,.,", ..,--:,..:!

29o l,/il leebl 75 *c'l'e t;ca'rt.

:;;"";:-,,1'i,;l :v$o rlsai;'r 3o( :reet;

il """,.,;l'l:l': ..i, :.-,,::';"-,,":*",;,,:',i;'';;;;;i;'-:'::

tuo.r(r or j..,,r:r6 , '\o r/2 I'oet 1:o the t,e1gl'nr::Lg,

:

FY i.l Trt :'r. a .,^,.t,^urJ. " t\ "

04r23,20LS t S:02 SAHAGUSilHE C0UHTY DIST CLREK il fA}()836 27s 889 P.001,002

,4 No. cv-12-9344 CI{ARLES and MARy LOU ALFORD, plaintiffs $ Nq THE DISTRICT COURT

vs.

ROBERT THON4AS MoIGITHEN, OF EOG RESOURCES, INC., ' and CENTRAL TEXAS LAND SERVICES, Defendants SAN AUGUSTINIE COI.INTY, TEXAS

ORDER ON CONSTRUCTION BY COURT OF.

WARRA]YTY DEED T,ROM.'ACN P. JESSUP ANI\IE ELIZ.A,BETH JESSUP rOErrAru,NS AND ALFORI)

tarnn:g,zoos on this th* '[a day of May, 2074'came on to be considercd plaintiffs, Motion for court to consfrue Doc'rnenr Prior to Evid.ence and submission of Issues to Jury in Trial. All paties we'represent and also appeared by and through cormsel ofrocord. The cout conside.red the motiorl tho argurnents of counsel and the authorities provided by them, and makes the following rutrng und orden

It is oRDERED that the warranty Deed &om Jack P, Jessup and Auie Elizabeth Jossup to Charles Alford and lVary Lou Alford dared April

Ambiguous t' 25, 2003, is, as a matter of

Not Ambiguous law:

It is further 0RDERED that under ths rules of construction of documents that the language stating a minetal reservation found in the description of a I17 acre trac,t described as Tract I in Exhibit "A" athched to that deed;

./ ./ Is lacorporated into the Deed 4 Is not Inoorporated into ths Deed

Pago I ofZ

0jf123r201 5 15:07 SAHAGUSTIHE COUHTY DISI CLEEK fAx)936 275 n89 P.002r002

*{

SIONED this the h_day of May ,2014.

Pags2 of2

CAUSE NO. CV-1a9344

CHARLES md MARY LOU ALFORI)

$ IN TIM I}I,STRICT COTJRT $ Plalwlfis, $ $ vs.

$ $ OF ROBERT TEOI\{AS MctrtrrTIIEFIi EOG RESOURCES, INC.i and $ $ *tif"tffi-%--

CENTRAL TEXAS LAIID SERVICES $ JEAN STEPTOE DtATICtEIEdt $ EANAJOIJSIIhF,TilAS Defendanl BY $ $ $ sAN AUGUSTnIE coItNTr, TEXAS

LAI}MS AI{D GANTI,EMEN OF THE JURYI

Aftsr.ths ,losfurg arquTenjs, you wiil go to.tFe jury room to deqide the oase, answer the questions that arc athchod, andreach i"ertict.

v6u;;ddr* uv lJ*Ds -y--* the case *iilrotlo;urors only when you are all together in the jury roont- --' Rcmembu my previous inshlctions: Do not d.iscuss the sase with,auyone else, either person or by any other mean8. Do not do an} ina.er"a*t in ir,uou;;lo" about tu" o*. orlooa*t *y researob' Do not look up any words in aistionariw about the caso on the raternlt. Do not * oi tfrr iot rn"r, Dp not post informaffon sbnre any epocial knowlodge or exporienoes jurors' Do not use yotlr phone or any lvith th' other other elecfronir a*i.u J*fig y"* a"ufiuuous rsason. [The co,rt will give you a nunb* forany emecgency.l wnere o-tnrr* *uvi**o you in caso of an

Aay notes you heve *: fo., your.o\rfnp€rff)nal uee. You may take your notes bflok into the j'ryroom and consultSg them {urini deliberations, il fellow jr'ors during your dolibe'ra:dons. Yournoi** ilo;;l"* orrcad yournores to your ure noiuJo*r9._Eagh of you slould rely on of the errldence and uot ue influsnced by nffiffiu,p;Tfffi#tJjif* the dt th"t anorher jruor

You must letve your notes with the bailiffwhen you 8rc not deliberating. The beiliffwill give your notes to me prcmptly aftor colleoting a safe, seculE losadou and not disclosed theru from you. i*ttt rrkr;il;;*Tt", are kept iu tL *yoor. An* you complete yow deliberations, the l*T-$_T:[:ct vort notes-. when vou ars tlreased fi.r*:"ry duty, th; uJr;1p*i]i promptly destoy yow notes so that nobody satr rssd what you *otu.

-'

Here arc tho instustions for answering the questions.

1' Do not let bias' proj'dice, or syrnpathy play any part in your decision.

\o\ ' N \l CHARcBoF ITIEcouRT

R%, ebl l/10

I t0/200'd 68gzs/egffi)ffJ) )3U1t $t0 AIHnot tH|lsngvHvs s?:0 t s t0zj]z/?0

2' Boso your o*.tn-*t onfl.oott"

Evidencs adrulttsd in court inst'cdons and questions' Do not coneld;; and on the law tbat is in these in ths cotttkoom.

vr di-*"* any uevsD! arrl ovidence eyroence tnat that \ewae not adaritted

3' You are to mske uP yow own minde about the f8cts. you are the sole judges ofthe ;f"Tilydfi fJtrSiliffiH"H-.ioE*in*tes'ruony.C#o;*,ttoso*aw, 4' If my instructions'se a word in.a way that ia differsnt fr.om its ordinary meaniug, use meaning I give you, which willbe _;rrpo l;g"l ;rfiri,i"o. the

5' All the quertionr and answers arc lnportant No oue should say that any qusstion antwer is not important, or

6' Answer "ytt^'-1t-.-"-o::* *l qry|I* be based on a.prepoudt*o* of tru rmless you al,e told othenvise.

A ..yes. answer must questiou requiree an answetr "vi{;;ii*il;you otao trran 1.;; ilil;jr aru told othenriseJ. whenevsr a yo.u. answar must be prepouderance ofthe evido,nce based on a [rurress you ar" tota-itterwierl.

7' The tmm'lrsponderunce of tho ovidence"

mesns the qreatnr weight of presented in this case. If you credible evidencc *'yes" do not nra tnrra pteponderuu"e of-["--;;;;r"

an$wetr, then anewir'ho-" Aproponaeta""i"o-rtn" support' a ntmber of wihesses or by the nrrmber;id;;rffr *td*";l; by tne ""t-iir*r,*d admitM in ovidenca, For a fact to a preponderance orthe HfilHf;|f ""td;*, ;;*urt roo aJtd; f;-i, rnoro likely E' Do not desids who you think ehould.w$.uerore you answ'r tbe questions aud snswcr tho questioru to match your thon just considering who will win' Do decision eoil'url*n q";;,il;;tulp without not discuss oiooGio the effest your e$wers will lave.

9, Do not ar'wer questions by drawing silaws or by any msthod of ohance.

10' some questions mighl-ask you fol a doliar amount, Do got agree a dollar amrount by adding in advanse to deside on

b

eacu:*"r;e ilffffithenfiguring the avonage.

I I' Do not tade yoru ar8wors' For exarryle, do not Bay, *'I wlll anewerthis question way if you en.swer ahothcr quostion your my way.,, 12' The answers to the questione must ba based on the decision of at least Tle samo 10 jrnors muet *gtt on l0 of the 12 jurors.

g-u="y a,urwer, Do not a$ea to be an*hing less than r0 j'ror{ evon if it#o"ldil;-.d;rfty. bound by a voto of

As I have said beforc, if you do not follow theselnstuctions, you will be gurlty rriscondust, and I mieht ha,/e ro waste vo'r time aud th9 paftios'

oru."r *;frftffiil;iiiri ofJuror o*ou., ovor again. This would morel, ard wo"lo;quiti i# topuy*r* a jwor urlake *v oruittu ortril, *unty to pay for ffitr#$'If 'orur, ditfrTpriin to stop and reporr it to me

CHARaBoF THECorrnr J^0

I t0/800'd 6882Sfi98ffiff4 x3u-ll Isto AIHflol tHllsntvHvs s!:0t s t0zr?zr?0

Presidtng Juror:

I ' when you go into the jury rnom to answer the quostionc, the first thing you will nesd to do ig ohoose aprestdingj**.

2. The presiding juror bas these ddies;

a, have tlre comprete charge rcad aroud if it wiil be helpfirr to your delibsrationa;

b. preside ovet your delibecatioru, meaning msnage the discussions, and see.that you follow these insfrushons;

c. give writterr questions or corrunents to the beiliffwho wil give then to tho judge;

d. rarite downtho answors you agres on;

e. get the slgnatures for ttre verdict certificnte;

and f. notif the beiliffthat you have rcached a verdict.

Do you underst8nd the duties ofthe presiding juror?

If you do not, please tell me now.

Instructions for SiSninS the Verdtct Certificate;

r You may rn'swer the questiotrs on a voto of 10 jurore. The same 10 jwors mu$ every answsr in ths oharge. This meaffyou agree on mey not have one group of l0 jurors agree on one nqswer and'a different soup of io iurois agr€6 0n another answef.

o lf l0j'rors agree on ev€ry &rswqr, those r0 jurors sign the vcrdict,

' If I I jurcrs agrce on sv6ry answer, those 1r jruors sign tho verdist, on evetv a'swar'

vou arc uuanimor.rs and onry the presiding juror H#l lfr."..lJ:fft*t ' AllJurors should deliberats on eveq qusstion. you may end up with alt lz of you agrceing on some u'lswers' while you sign the ve'rdisL only those 103iti ro ;i;;agrce on othcr anew'r*. But when wiro ugrrr oo ";iiarulw€r will sign the verdict, "i"ry Do you rurderstand thess instuctions? If you do rrot, please tell me now.

CHARoEoFtlaCornr 3n0

t t0/?00'd gg$ffJ)

6sEZ SlZ )t3u-ll Isto AIHnot SMISn'VHVS 9?:0t s roz/Fzr?o

pFrIF{ITION,F r

Throughout this oharge, the followingtenns shall have the rneaning indicated:

1' '"The Alfords" mesne the Plaintiffi charles Alford aod Mary Lou Alford.

2, '"Ihe Jessttp$" means Jaok p. Jeesup and Annio Elizabeth Jossup. 3' 'McKefthen" meflns Defendaut Robert Thomas MoKeithsn, in 0ll his oapacities.

4. "EOG" moans Defendant EOG Resources, Inc.

5' "cenhal rexat Land servicos"means Defemdant cental rcxas Land seruices.

6' Tho 'Deed" m.eqol-+e April zs, z00r lvananty ---rr? sE Deed wtth vendor,s Lim from the Jessups to the Alfords.

7

' 'nrract one" meane ths I 17-50 acre tract of land located of san Augustino, Toxas, and that is more pffit"Jlty about soven miles west desoribed as Tmcr one in the Deed.

cHARoE oFTtE couni 4n0

t r0/s00'd 68EZ SlZ gEffifiJ )EU-D rsto AlHnot tH|IsnDvHvs 9?:0[ s toz/?zr]o

QuesrloN No'

eueston:

tbat thev have ttfle ro an undtvided il#;,filfltflr^"ed one-hslf of the minerat eetate

Iustructioni To establish title' the Alfords mu$ (1) prcv€ B rsgulsr*cilain of conveyances (2) estabrish zuperior titlc oui from the sovereim oi a eommon"*,ifi";'J"on eource, gry:: riie rttle by prror poesession couplod rimitations, or (4) pm";

*fth;;;f .tl was nor abandoned.

nrcvail onlv on the zuperiority of their tifle, ff"#ff{:ffi not on rhe wearness of

You are instructed that it is undisputed thet prior to execr.ding the Deed, undivided one-half of the minemls the Jessups owned an boueath fr;-il. Thr q"U;;""#il whether the Deed reeervsd ot *nuuyra tq" .mr*r irrt"r.ri If it reser;; for you to decids is f,newor'T'tro," and if it conveyed tne dinorar irG;;t;wor ..yes-r, the minerar r"t';

You are firrther instruct'd that Erfiibit A was incorporated into tlre Dced.

You aro ftrther instructed that a desd will pass all of the estqte the tlme of the conveyance rylantr udess oumcd by the grautor at . couveyed.

there erc ,rru*itioos or exceptions whiclr reduce the estate

Anrwer: Ao,\ Gr i'Yos* or,*o.,, j0-*

GIARoE oF THB count 5/t0

I r0r900'd 68gZ S/U gEd)fiJ x3ull Isto AIHn0t 3t{tlsntvHvs 9?:0t s t0zJ?z/?0

QUESTION No, 2 "No' to Question No. l, then anewor this question. otherwiso f;'::$ff**"d do not answor rhi'

Question:

be rerom,ed euch that the rosorvation ffi#f-t'#tdJffiTrffitlr"#J"tJjfd orminersis

Instruction: To be ontitled to a reforrnation of tle Deed, tho Alfords must provs thnt (r) there was agroourent beforsthe Deed was an writtery and-(4il; wqs amutual mistake, original agreopen! in made sfterths ryduetug the agrecment to uniting tlrat to d;;- ;rt rJioc,t the agreemont the parties to the Deedi !*J of You arE iffkuct€d that to prov6 a ltrn-utual migtake," the {Ifotds ml{ prove (l)a mistake of fact, .9/rf;*d$#allv bv tno fanies to the nr"a, cuuoa *r,r.hfi*i.li; -d;, tho subject matte,r

You are firrther instrustsd tbat a *uT*ty deed will pass all of the oshte owned by the grantor ff"ff:ai the convevance unless tk;;;;;;.;fi; or orcoprioru which reduce the ostate at

Arrswer: nn Answer "Yss".or'\{o.. *l! L _

CltARoBoFTlcCouRT 6tr0

t ro//oo'd 6sgz s/z gcffiffJ x3u'D rst0 AHn0t tH|IsngvHvs 9f:0[ s toz/?zr!0

QUESTTON NO. 3 "Yos" to Quesdon No. 2, then fllHffi#:"d auswer thie quostion. orherwise do not answer

Quostion:: Have ths Arfords provod that they euiercised due diligence in reviewing the Deed?

Instructlon: You are inst'cte'd that ths standard of diligenee in rcviewiqg the Deed is that djrigecrse ordinary prudent lr.rson would havous.a udl thr il;;;rir"ilar oircumetsnoes.

sn

Anrwerl Answer *yes' or,No.r,_lI_

cHer,aeorrfi couRT-

7n0 r r0r800'd 68EZ $/Z gEffiffJ)

x3u-D ISt0 A${nol SilrsnDvHvs 9}:0[ s r0z/fzrFo

QIJBSTIONNO.4 "Ye'" to Question f;tilltrtr-d 'qo'

3, then answer this question.

othervuise do not a'swer

Quesflonl By what dan did the Alfods discover, lave discovered by exercieing reasonable aud diligonce, the reservation *ili; :irh:"ld ror rract o", r" g*rrrtit A care "f to the Deed?

Instructlons You ane instrrrcted tlrat the etandard of diligenrce in raviewing the Deed is that dlrigence an ordinary pnrdentperson would nuu.

u."a ffilffi ilir";"J*rar circumshue,ss.

Angwer: Answer byinserting a specificn monh, day and yesr. _ .

CT{ARoE oFII{8 coI.,RT vl0 r t0/600'd 68EZ SlZ 980()ffJ) IIU'D lst0 A$no) 3H[sngvHvs 9?:0t s toe/?zt?o

REQUTSTED QtrEsTroN NO. 5

HnffiH'iil#il#*lr*:1il:' t or "Yes" to Question No. 2, then answsr this question.

Queetlon: whst sum of money' if gy, if paid rcy Alfods for the damages, if any, tn*tlttur*aT -oash, woula raifland reasonnbly compe,nsatc ths m* oe roin#, bensath Tragt olsbelng leased?

fnstruction: You shatl considsr only.the difibrcnce, il *y, botween the ruyalty the Alfords received and the ;HH#,*#;H:f#rHffiru:Jmitn"l,*"i,l,r,,r.n;r,m.ilil;;titreroone. Do not add any amount for lntsest on damages, if any,

Angwer: Axswerin doilars and cents, if any,.

$.

cnARcE 0F THB couni 9n0 .

I toro to'd 6Btz s/z ggd)ffJ) xtu'E Isto AIHnol SH|ISnDVHVS 9?:0t s t0zrlz/Fo

C\t*re-qry++ VERDICT CERTFICATE If the verdict is unanimoru, t'e prssidingj*r,or should sign below.

Preslding Juror

Ifthe verdict ie not unanimo's, then the deciding jruon shourd sign berow.

tr{ffi-' ffiH,#J pyurS/rtuTf,fiii

cuenoeoFnrgdti tOtr0 t I0/1 t0'd eE$ffJ 68EZ S/Z x3u-lt Istc AIHn0) 3H|lsntvHvs 9?:0 t s toz/lz/Fo

No. cv-i2_-e344 '*ffiJi?ffi tri on,,{tffi*, dy;i sY* :#ffiS ALFORD AND MARY LOU ! IN TFIE DISTRICI-'OUO4Z:'-:=** Plaintiffs, $ $

v.! $ 1ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT ROBERT THOMAS T4CKEITHEN, g EOG RESOURCES,II{C. AND '

*

CENTRAL TEXAS LAND SER'ICES Defendants. d $ SAru AUGUSTINE COUNTY, TEXAS

JUDGMENT A trial in this cause was held on Viay 6 and7,2014.

Alford ancl Mary Lou Alforcl, Plaintiffs herein, ro, triulh*les appeared and announced readv

o.r.,o*,13;:'.Jf,r,n i"o:rffi;T#;*i anci centrai rexas La'd Services, A jury was dr-rly acceptecl, impaneled, and sworn. The jury retumed argument, ancl trre courr's inrt.u.tionr, its verdict after.

frli}.t,j|! iljilLli; uno ur", ,..i.iri"g any speciar

Plaintiffs' Claims with respect to the cause of action.for Trespass to 1ry fitre asserted by plaintiffs charres Alford and Mary Lou Alford against Def'enclant itou.rt iho*u, McKeithen, the jury finds in charres arr",a ancr Marv r"u ffiT"Ktrti fffffili,:ijJ'"intiffs air",d shau rAKE with respect to the cause of action fo' Reformation of a Deed assefied by piaintifl.s charles Alford and Mary Lou Alford against ttei-enclanf Robert rnomu, HaiK.i,h.n, the jury *Hitlirfti|fiilfl:ff:f;11,:na-piarntins cna'res alrord and M".t i;;;rrord shari rArr with.espect to the cause of actio'

for Declaratory Judgment asserted by plaintiffs charles Alford a'd Mary Lou alfo'cl -rvicKeithen, against Defendants Roberi rrro,nu, Resources' Inc' and central Texas EoG Lano sirui9.9, in favor Plaintiffs charles Alford and Mary r,ou 1L.:w'nno, r"lo Defendants, and attor,t shall TAKBNO,THINIG by"iway of such claim.

Any relief not expressly granted on Plaintiff's'

McKeithen' EoG Resources, in-c. and claims against l)efendants Robert Thomas central 'fexas t-ana s.ruices is nil]igo.

disposes of ail causes of action which we'.e asserted or could have been This order asserted in this lawsuit.

Judgment CHARLES ALFORD itND MARy LOU ALFORD y. ROBER t. T HOMAS A4CKE:

EoG RESIURCES /NC |HEN, AND cENTRAL rtns teiirTtnncts Page I

Any reiiel'not expressly granted on Defendants EoG Resources, Inc.,s and central Land services's claims against i)efendant rexas Robert 'fhornas McKeithen is npxtgo.

disposes of all car-rses of action '''^"hich';iere This order asseitecl or courd have bee..rr-rul in rhis iaws'it.

Costs of Co_urt

Costs are hereby taxed against pjaintiffs.

postiudgment Interest

ir is furlher OI{DERED, ADJUDGED and DECREE,D accr'e on the arnounts awarded hereinabove that nostjr-idgrnenl nterest sliall at thc rate ol. 10% per annum from the date judgment is signed until paid. this

Enforcement of Judgment IT IS ORDERED that any parly in favor of whom enforce this judgment through abstiact, .judgment is awarded is entitled to execution and any other process necessary.

Relief Not Granted This judgment finally clisposes of all parties and ail claims and is appealable.

SIGNED on _5le"g ,2014.

APPROVED AS TO FORtvt:

Attorney for Defendant Roberl Thomas McKeithen 1 17 Nolth Street, Suite 2

Nacogdoches, Texas 7 5961 Tel. (936) 564-9000 Fax, (936) 715-6022 Email: noelcooper@noelcooper.c0m

CHARLES ALFORD AND MAT?Y ],OL] ALFORD Y, ROBERI I'HOMAS MCKEIT'HEN, EOC RESOURCES, INC AND CENTRAL TEXAS LAND SERrCI:S Page 2

Tom Rorie Attonrey fot'Cha-rles Alford and Mary Lou Alford Attorney at Law 210 North Street Nacogdoches, Texas 7 5961 Tel: (936) s59-1 I 88 Fax: (936) 559-0099

Jason R. Mills Attorney for EoG Resources, Inc. and centrai 'lexas Land Services Freeman Mills PC 110 N, College, Suite 1400 Tyler, Texas 15102 Tel: (903) 592-7755 Fax: (903) 592-1187

Judgrnent cHARLES ALF)RD AND MARI'Lou ALFoRD I/. RoRER'rI-HotvtA,s L./cKLrrHEN, EOC RESOURCEE /NC, AND CENTRAL TEXAS I,AND S!]?,C6S

NO. Cv"12 _9344 CHARLES and MARY LOU ALFORD, plaintiffs $ n'r THE DISTRTCT COURT

VS,

ROBERT THOMAS McKEITHEN, OF EOG RESOURCES, fNC., ' and CENTML TEXAS LAND SiRViCES, Defendants SAN AUGUSTINE COI-NTY, TEXAS FILED

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Now coME' CHARLES ALFORD and MARY Lou ALFORD, hereilrafter refened to as "Plaintiffs"' and m.ve the corut to grant a ne\4r trial in this case, showing as foilows:

1.

The court signed a Judgrnent in this case on May 23,2014. Thatjudgrnont disposes of ail issues in the qase, and decrees that plainriffs take nothing by way of their suit.

2,

A new trial should be granted for the reason that the triai court ened in holding that the language regarding a reservation of minerals found in the attached Exhibit ,,A,, to the warranty Deed fncm Jack Jessup and Annie Elizabeth Jessup to charles Alford and Mary Lou Alford, dated April 25' 2003 ("warranry Deed'), is incorporated into thai deed and effective as a part thereof,

3.

The wan'anty Deed expressly states that it incorporates Exhibit .,A,, f.r the sole purpose of

Page l Alford v McKeithcn et al Mtn New Trial

eoA* n)F rnAl I r.|ir. I EnE F t, hF6/w $ providing a metes and bounds d.escription for location of the pr.peily on the ground.

Any other language included on Exhibit "A" for any other puryose in addition to that necessary to provide a metes and bounds des*iption is surplusage and shourd be disregarded.

4.

By finding that the entire contents of Exhibit "A" to the wananty Deed the court violated the basic rure of contract construction that the ranguage used by the pafties t0 an aseement or conveyance is to be given the effect intended by the parties as srrown by the dooument itself, 5,

The court should new triai and rule that the lang,age $ant a in Exhibit ,0A,, attached to the warranly Deed that refers to a rese.ation ofminerals is disregarded and that no mineral reservation was effective' The court should set the case for trial on plaintiffs, claims for damages and aftomey,

s

fees.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request that the court grant a new trial, enter an irrteriocutory judgment that no minerai reservation was made in the wafianty Deed, and set the case for triai on Piaintiffs' claims for damages and aftot'ney's fees; Plaintiffs fiuther seek such other rerief as thev may be entitled to receive, either in law or in equity,

Page 2 Alford v McKcithen et al Mtn NewTrial

trfln,7nn"l eoe7 c t, oFcrvr. n

Respectfully submitted.

State Bar No. 1723g000 210 Norrh Street Nacogdoches, TX ,/|196l (e36) 5s9-1 188 FAX (e36) ss9_00ee ATTOR,NEY F'OR, FLAINTIFFS

foregoing document has M-#'#y#ifitT:flo-tj,fe been served on opposins counser this

Mr, Jason R, Mills Mr, Graham I(. Simms Fleeman Miils pC Facsirnite (903) SgZ_7 7 87

Mr'. Noel D. Cooper Law Offices of Noel D.

Cooper Facsimiie (936) 7 tS-6022

Mr. Bitl McWhorter Bill McWhorter & Associates Facsimile (936) 564_645 s

Page 3 Alford v McKeithen et al Mtn New Trial

cflnren11. J Efitr' F l, AF6/w rl

ffdn.'.

-ey'/A,.

'U t!/t, .w(7 ""4, lol'{ "{} ^

N0. cv-12-9344 CTIARLES AI,F'OI{S .Al\D MAR.Y LOIJ $ IN THE DISTRICT COURT .{LFORI} ii Flaintiffs, 6 :

v' s $

I

crF

R.OBER.T TFIOIV{AS N4CKEtrTHEN, $ EOG RESOUR.CES, iNC. AND 6 CENTRAI, TtrXAS I-AND SER.VICES 6 Defendants. $ sary.aLIGUSTINE couNTy, TEXAS

OR.DER DENYING

on August 22,2a14, the Courl considered the Plaintiffs'Motion for New Trial. and the respollse thereto, and after Lrearing the arguments the Cour:t finds that the Motion fbr New Trial

should be []ENIEI].

Sigrled on

JUDGE PRE$--Iq.ING