Home/Texas Supreme Court/Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. Weed

Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. Weed

50 S.W.2d 1080, 121 Tex. 427, 85 A.L.R. 391, 1932 Tex. LEXIS 134
CourtTexas Supreme Court
DecidedMay 16, 1932
DocketNo. 5055.
StatusPublished
Cited by118 cases

This text of 50 S.W.2d 1080 (Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. Weed) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. Weed, 50 S.W.2d 1080, 121 Tex. 427, 85 A.L.R. 391, 1932 Tex. LEXIS 134 (Tex. 1932).

Opinion

Mr. Judge LEDDY

of the Commission of Appeals delivered the opinion for the court.

This case involves the title to .43 acres of land, being a strip 104.7 feet by 196.3 feet, a part of the John Douthit survey in Jefferson county, Texas, included within the right-of-way of the Texas & New Orleans Railway.

This suit was instituted by defendants in error, J. F. Weed, and the Gulf Production Company, against plaintiffs in error to restrain the latter from drilling said tract of land for oil. After a hearing the injunction was granted, as prayed for. An appeal was taken to the Court of Civil Appeals, where the judgment of the trial court was affirmed. (300 S. W., 171).

The Douthit survey of land, of which this tract was a part, contained 152 acres. Martha D. Janes is shown to have acquired it through a regular chain of title. On November 1, 1881, she conveyed to the Sabine & East Texas Railway Company a right-of-way 200 feet in width across the tract. This •easement subsequently passed to and is now owned by the Texas ■& New Orleans Railway Company.

The title to the entire Douthit survey passed regularly from Martha D. Janes to Jeff Chaison and J. M. Hebert, subject to the right-of-way referred to.

Chaison and Hebert sold 100 acres off the south portion of the survey, leaving a balance of fifty-two acres, upon which *433 was situated the railroad right-of-way 200 feet in width, and containing 3.32 acres.

After Chaison’s death his heirs entered into an agreement with J. M. Hebert for a partition of this land, and in order to carry such agreement into effect, the tract was subdivided into eight lots. The plat of this subdivision shows the boundaries of the lots, the acreage of each, and their location with reference to the right-of-way. Thereafter Hebert and the Chaison heirs executed a partition deed, the pertinent portions of which are as follows:

“Know all men by these presents: That we” the Chaison heirs, and “J. M. Hebert, for and in consideration of executing a partition between J. M. Hebert, on the one hand and the said” Chaison heirs “on the other hand, have agreed to the following partition of a part of the John Douthit survey of land situated in Jefferson County, Texas, it being fifty-two (52) acres off the northeast part or end of said survey, * * * said fifty-two acres and the subdivision thereof being fully shown and described by the hereto attached plat, which is marked exhibit X and made a part of this deed. That is to say, the said” Chaison heirs (naming them) “hereby release and relinquish unto said J. M. Hebert as his share of said land to be held by him in severalty, lots and blocks No. two (2) and Four (4) as shown by said plat, containing 5 and 27/100 acres each. Also Lots or Blocks Six (6) and Eight (8) as shown by said plat containing six and nine-tenths (6.9) acres each.
“To have and to hold unto one the said J. M. Hebert in severalty as his share of said fifty-two acres, and the said J. M. Hebert, releases and relinquishes unto said” Chaison heirs (naming them) “the following lots or blocks as shown by said plat which is attached hereto each being a part of said 52 acres of said John Douthit survey to wit:
“Lots or Blocks One (1) and Three (3) of five and 27/100 acres each: Also lots and blocks Five (5) and seven (7) of six and nine-tenths acres (6.9) each.
“To have and to hold unto the said” Chaison heirs (naming them) “in severalty as their share of said Fifty-two acres of land.”

The plat attached to this deed, with the land in dispute, shown in the shaded portion, is as follows:

*434

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

Related

Richard D. Crawford v. XTO Energy, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2019
Noah S. Bunker, Paul Carrell, Everett Brew Houston, Jr., W. Andrew Buchholz, Scott J. Leighty, Jad L. Davis, and Holly Clause v. Tracy D. Strandhagen
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2015
Glover v. Union Pacific Railroad
187 S.W.3d 201 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Vial v. Gas Solutions, Ltd.
187 S.W.3d 220 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2006)
Robert Lee Franklin v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Moore v. Energy States, Inc.
71 S.W.3d 796 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)
Reagan v. Marathon Oil Co.
50 S.W.3d 70 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)
Calumet National Bank as Trustee Under Trust No. P-3362 v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
682 N.E.2d 785 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1997)
Smith v. Smith
622 A.2d 642 (Supreme Court of Delaware, 1993)
Krenek v. Texstar North America, Inc.
787 S.W.2d 566 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Williams v. Cooper
504 S.W.2d 564 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1973)
Melton v. Davis
443 S.W.2d 605 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Angelo v. Biscamp
441 S.W.2d 524 (Texas Supreme Court, 1969)
Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. Hunt Petroleum Corp.
439 S.W.2d 853 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Freeman v. Affiliated Property Craftsmen
266 Cal. App. 2d 723 (California Court of Appeal, 1968)
Malcolm J. Henley and Mary K. Henley v. The United States
396 F.2d 956 (Court of Claims, 1968)
State v. Fuller
407 S.W.2d 215 (Texas Supreme Court, 1966)
Ervay, Inc. v. Wood
373 S.W.2d 380 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1963)
Colligan v. Smith
366 S.W.2d 816 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1963)
Redding Foods, Inc. v. Berry
361 S.W.2d 467 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
50 S.W.2d 1080, 121 Tex. 427, 85 A.L.R. 391, 1932 Tex. LEXIS 134, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rio-bravo-oil-co-v-weed-tex-1932.