Dimock Operating Company, and Joe W. Dimock, D/B/A Dimock Petroleum v. Sutherland Energy Co., LLC

Texas Supreme Court·Decided October 19, 2015·No. 07-15-00297-CV·Published

Opinion

ACCEPTED 07-15-00297-cv SEVENTH COURT OF APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS 10/19/2015 10:03:21 PM Vivian Long, Clerk

No. 07-15-00297-CV FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS 7th COURT OF APPEALS AMARILLO, TEXAS SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS 10/19/2015 10:03:21 PM ________________________ VIVIAN LONG CLERK DIMOCK OPERATING COMPANY, and JOE W. DIMOCK, D/BA DIMOCK PETROLEUM, Appellants,

v.

SUTHERLAND ENERGY CO., LLC Appellee.

On appeal from Cause No. 11,098 th 46 District Court, Hardeman County, Texas Hon. Dan Mike Bird, Judge Presiding

BRIEF OF APPELLANT

Respectfully submitted,

Lovell, Lovell, Newsom & Isern, L.L.P. John H. Lovell, SBN 12609300 (john@lovell-law.net) Barbara A. Bauernfeind, SBN 08190500 (barbara@lovell-law.net) 112 West 8th Avenue, Suite 1000 Amarillo, Texas 79101-2314 Telephone: (806) 373-1515 Facsimile: (806) 379-7176 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT

ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED (TEX.R.APP.P. 39.1)

i

IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL The following is a list of parties and counsel to the trial court’s judgment, as

required by Rule 38.1(a), of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure.

TRIAL JUDGE: Honorable Dan Mike Bird 46th Judicial District - Hardeman County 1700 Wilbarger Street, Room 34A Vernon, Texas 76384 Telephone: (940) 552-7051 Facsimile: (940) 552-0305

APPELLANT (DEFENDANT): Dimock Operating Company, and Joe W.

Dimock, d/b/a Dimock Petroleum.

TRIAL COUNSEL: Lovell, Lovell, Newsom & Isern, L.L.P.

John H. Lovell, SBN 12609300 (john@lovell-law.net) Barbara A. Bauernfeind, SBN 08190500 (barbara@lovell-law.net) 112 West 8th Avenue, Suite 1000 Amarillo, Texas 79101-2314 Telephone: (806) 373-1515 Facsimile: (806) 379-7176

Cornell D. Curtis, P.C. Cornell Curtis, SBN 24007069 (vernonlaw@sbcglobal.net) 1716 Main Street Vernon, Texas 76384 Telephone: (940) 552-9100 Facsimile: (940) 552-2655

ii

APPELLATE COUNSEL: Lovell, Lovell, Newsom & Isern, L.L.P.

John H. Lovell, SBN 12609300 (john@lovell-law.net) Barbara A. Bauernfeind, SBN 08190500 (barbara@lovell-law.net) 112 West 8th Avenue, Suite 1000 Amarillo, Texas 79101-2314 Telephone: (806) 373-1515 Facsimile: (806) 379-7176

Cornell D. Curtis, P.C. Cornell Curtis, SBN 24007069 (vernonlaw@sbcglobal.net) 1716 Main Street Vernon, Texas 76384 Telephone: (940) 552-9100 Facsimile: (940) 552-2655

APPELLEE (PLAINTIFF): Sutherland Energy Co., LLC

TRIAL COUNSEL: Malone Law Firm Chris Lehman, SBN 24046286 (clehman@malonelawtx.com) 1901 Lamar Street P.O. Box 953 Vernon, Texas 76385 Telephone: (940) 552-9946 Facsimile: (940) 552-9925

Walters, Balido & Crain, L.L.P. Jerry L. Ewing, Jr., SBN 06755470 Nathan R. Cash, SBN 24072026 Meadow Park Tower, 15th Floor 10440 North Central Expressway Dallas, Texas 75231 Telephone: (214) 749-4805 Facsimile: (214) 760-1670

iii

APPELLATE COUNSEL: Malone Law Firm Chris Lehman, SBN 24046286 (clehman@malonelawtx.com) 1901 Lamar Street P.O. Box 953 Vernon, Texas 76385 Telephone: (940) 552-9946 Facsimile: (940) 552-9925

Walters, Balido & Crain, L.L.P. Jerry L. Ewing, Jr., SBN 06755470 Nathan R. Cash, SBN 24072026 Meadow Park Tower, 15th Floor 10440 North Central Expressway Dallas, Texas 75231 Telephone: (214) 749-4805 Facsimile: (214) 760-1670

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS IDENTITY OF PARTIES AND COUNSEL ........................................................... II TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... V TABLE OF AUTHORITIES ................................................................................ VIII STATEMENT OF THE CASE .................................................................................. 1 STATEMENT REGARDING ORAL ARGUMENT ............................................... 2 ISSUES PRESENTED...............................................................................................2 A. ISSUES AS TO JULY 7, 2015 TEMPORARY INJUNCTION ....................... 2

B. ISSUES AS TO JULY 9, 2015 ORDER............................................................ 6

STATEMENT OF FACTS ........................................................................................6 SUMMARY OF THE ARGUMENT ......................................................................22 ARGUMENT ...........................................................................................................23 A. Standard of Review ..........................................................................................23

B. Rules of Construction and Contract Interpretation ..........................................24

C. Sutherland “Interpretation” Not Consistent With Texas Law .........................26

D. After Trial Court Erroneously Authorized Unlimited Spending, Injunction Now Authorizes Unlimited Time to Drill ....................................28

E. Trial Court Action Constitutes an Erroneous Pretrial Forfeiture of Leasehold .......................................................................................................30

F. Contract Construction Harmonizing and Giving Effect to All Provisions ......................................................................................................31

G. Limits on Project Costs Common in Operating Agreements...........................32

H. Partial Assignment of Oil, Gas and Mineral Lease Was Subject to Parties’ November 20, 2012 Agreement including the Operating Agreement.....................................................................................36

I. Trial Court Erroneously Rewrote Contract ......................................................37

v

J. Lack of Probable Right to Recover ..................................................................38

K. Mandatory Provisions Are Abuse of Discretion ..............................................39

L. Injunction Erroneously Compels Assignment Even If Well Is Not Drilled and Completed Within Contract Deadline ........................................40

M. Lack of Imminent Harm ...................................................................................41

N. Injunction Erroneously Has No Provision Requiring Compliance with Contract by Sutherland ..........................................................................41

O. Injunction Order Erroneously Provided Investment Assurance ......................42

P. Pending Suit and Lis Pendens Already Made Drilling Additional Wells a Risk for Sutherland, and is Privileged, So There Is No Imminent Harm..............................................................................................42

Q. Appellant Entitled to Maintain that Sutherland has Breached Contract and to File Lis Pendens ...................................................................46

R. Destroyed Status Quo .......................................................................................47

S. Violated Statute of Frauds ................................................................................49

T. Violated Statute of Conveyances .....................................................................49

U. Erroneous Order of Specific Performance of Non-Existent Contract..........................................................................................................50

V. Illegal Prior Restraint on Speech......................................................................51

W. Prior Breaches of Contract Bar Injunctive Relief ............................................53

X. Injunctive Relief Not Available to Party Guilty of Inequitable Conduct, Laches, and Unclean Hands ...........................................................60

Y. No “Repudiation” by Dimock ..........................................................................60

Z. Injunction Improperly Restrains Right to Relief for Future Breaches of Contract......................................................................................62

vi

AA. Injunction Erroneously Granted Without Joinder of Necessary Parties.............................................................................................................63

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

Dimock Operating Company, and Joe W. Dimock, D/B/A Dimock Petroleum v. Sutherland Energy Co., LLC, (Tex. 2015).

Dimock Operating Company, and Joe W. Dimock, D/B/A Dimock Petroleum v. Sutherland Energy Co., LLC (Dimock Operating Company, and Joe W. Dimock, D/B/A Dimock Petroleum v. Sutherland Energy Co., LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Near v. Minnesota Ex Rel. Olson
283 U.S. 697 (Supreme Court, 1931)
Organization for a Better Austin v. Keefe
402 U.S. 415 (Supreme Court, 1971)
Ashcroft v. Mattis
431 U.S. 171 (Supreme Court, 1977)
Alexander v. United States
509 U.S. 544 (Supreme Court, 1993)
American Manufacturers Mutual Insurance Co. v. Schaefer
124 S.W.3d 154 (Texas Supreme Court, 2003)
Valence Operating Co. v. Dorsett
164 S.W.3d 656 (Texas Supreme Court, 2005)
Cross Timbers Oil Co. v. Exxon Corp.
22 S.W.3d 24 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000)
Blaschke v. Wiede
649 S.W.2d 749 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Davenport v. Garcia
834 S.W.2d 4 (Texas Supreme Court, 1992)
Cox v. Davison
397 S.W.2d 200 (Texas Supreme Court, 1965)
Mengden v. Peninsula Production Co.
544 S.W.2d 643 (Texas Supreme Court, 1976)
Beaumont Bank, N.A. v. Buller
806 S.W.2d 223 (Texas Supreme Court, 1991)
Grace Holdings, L.P. v. Sunshine Mining & Refining Co.
901 F. Supp. 853 (D. Delaware, 1995)
Casanova v. Falstaff Beer, Inc.
304 S.W.2d 207 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1957)
Tri-Star Petroleum Co. v. Tipperary Corp.
101 S.W.3d 583 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Marketshare Telecom, L.L.C. v. Ericsson, Inc.
198 S.W.3d 908 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
LeFaucheur v. Williams
807 S.W.2d 20 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Hammonds v. Hammonds
313 S.W.2d 603 (Texas Supreme Court, 1958)
IMCO Oil & Gas Co. v. Mitchell Energy Corp.
911 S.W.2d 916 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)