Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Royal Petroleum Corp.

137 S.W.2d 753, 135 Tex. 12, 1940 Tex. LEXIS 161
CourtTexas Commission of Appeals
DecidedMarch 13, 1940
DocketNo. 1806-7380
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 137 S.W.2d 753 (Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Royal Petroleum Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Commission of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Royal Petroleum Corp., 137 S.W.2d 753, 135 Tex. 12, 1940 Tex. LEXIS 161 (Tex. Super. Ct. 1940).

Opinion

TAYLOR, Commissioner.

This suit was filed by Royal Petroleum Corporation against B. B. and G. E. Caster, husband and wife, the Republic National Bank & Trust Company of Dallas, Allen [754]*754K. Puckett, and the Shell Petroleum Corporation. For convenience the parties named will be designated as the Royal, the Casters, the Bank, Puckett, and the Shell.

The controversy arose out of the following facts:

The Casters on July 19, 1932, owned a lease containing about 41 acres of land in Rusk County, Texas. The Royal on the date mentioned purchased it, paying therfe-for .$1,500 in cash, and agreeing to pay a further consideration of “$25,000.00 payable out of ¼⅛ of %ths of all the oil and gas produced, saved and marketed from * * * the tract * * * from wells ■* *■ *• now drilled or to be hereafter drilled thereon.”

The Royal, after purchasing the lease, operated it, and delivered the oil produced therefrom to the several purchasers of, the oil runs. During all of the time involved the Royal was the operator, and was in charge of the lease and the oil produced therefrom, and its delivery to the various purchasers.

After the Casters conveyed the lease to the Royal they sold partial interests in the $25,000 oil-payment to several purchasers, respectively, including Puckett. The sales were evidenced by transfer orders, signed and acknowledged, the first, of which to Puckett, reads in part:

“Magnolia Petroleum Company Transfer Order
“To Magnolia Petroleum Company,
Dallas, Texas
“February 16, 1933
“The undersigned, having transferred, as indicated below, oil production of wells numbered one and up on (here follows description of land covered by lease), you are hereby authorized, beginning * * * on the 1st day of February^ 1933, and until further notice, to give credit for oil received on account of said interest so transferred as follows:
Credit to Transferred Interest P. O. Address Allen K. Puckett $50.00 per month * * *
"Due on the 12th of each month out of Mrs. G. E. ■ Cáster and B. B. Caster’s interest, * * *. '
“The above payments shall continue for twenty (20) consecutive months or until the total sum of $1,000.00 has been paid Allen K. Puckett, payments ‘to begin March 12, ' 1933 (here follow signatures of the Cásters, attested by witnesses). :
“The undersigned certify that they are the legal owners of the interest above transferred and warrant the title thereto, and the Magnolia Petroleum Company is hereby authorized until further notice to receive oil for purchase from said parties subject to the following conditions: * * *
“6. Sellers severally agree to notify Magnolia Petroleum Company of any change of ownership, it being understood that any vendee or assignee of said wells or the production-thereof shall take same subject to the-terms hereof.”

The foregoing order is signed also b}r Puckett.

The Casters and Puckett executed five such transfer orders of partial interests respectively out of the $25,000 oil payment, aggregating $8,550, as follows: No. 1, dated February 16, 1933, for $1,000 payable $50 per month; No.. 2,- dated March 17, 1933, for $1,000 payable $50 per month; No. 3, dated April 25⅛ 1933, for $2,550 payable $75 per month; No. 4, dated October 3, 1933, for $1,000 payable $50 per month; No. 5, dated February 21, 1934, for $3,000 payable $125 per month.

They were all acknowledged and filed for record in the deed records of Rusk County.

Subsequent to the sale of the-lease by the Casters to the Royal (July 19, 1932), and prior to February 1, 1935, purchasers of the oil produced from the lease paid the Casters and their assigns the total sum of $24,899.88, lacking only $100.12 of being payment in' full of the $25,000 oil-payment.

The Magnolia was the first purchaser of the oil runs. The Lion Oil Refining Company was its successor as purchaser. The Shell succeeded the Lion as purchaser and' was taking the oil runs when this controversy arose in 1935. There was no connection between the companies takipg the oil runs. One merely succeeded the other as an independent purchaser.

On March 29, 1934, a short time before the Shell began taking the oil runs (May 21, 1934), Puckett assigned'to the bank as Collateral to secure his indebtedness to it then or thereafter existing, the five transfer, orders, or oil payments, above described (then partly liquidated), payable in the aggregate, at the rate of $350 per month. The assignment, among other things, directs and empowers '“the purchaser of oil * * * ' to pay direct to Republic Bank & Trust Company * * * every and all sums of money - * ' * * when and as they [755]*755become due and payable to Allen K. Puckett *' * * by virtue of said oil payments,” the oil payments referred to being those evidenced by the five transfer orders above described. It further authorized the bank to receive and collect and apply same to the payment of Puckett’s indebtedness to the bank, present and future. The assignment was duly acknowledged and was recorded in Rusk County on March 30, 1934.

The Shell made no distribution until after it received a division order signed by the respective owners of the parties’ interests in the $25,000 Caster oil payment. After it became the purchaser, it sent to the Royal, the operator of the lease, a blank division order form and requested substantially that the names of those owning partial interests in the working interest of the lease and the respective proportions in which owned, be inserted, and that proper signatures be secured. The request was complied with and the division order, executed by the parties at interest, was returned by the Royal to the Shell.

Omitting the unfilled blanks, the names of witnesses, the description of the land covered by the lease, certain immaterial (for present purposes) paragraphs, the postoffice addresses and penciled notations, the division order is as follows:

“Division Order
To Shell Petroleum Corporation,
St. Louis, Missouri. June 9th, 1934
The undersigned certify and guarantee that they are the legal owners of the oil produced from Wells Nos. 1 and up on the lease (involved herein), including royalty interest, and until further notice you will give credit for all oil received from said wells as per directions below:

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

Related

Miller v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
918 S.W.2d 658 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1996)
Cox v. Klug
855 S.W.2d 276 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)
PPG Industries, Inc. v. Shell Oil Co.
727 F. Supp. 285 (E.D. Louisiana, 1989)
Travis Bank & Trust v. State
660 S.W.2d 851 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Samano v. Sun Oil Co.
621 S.W.2d 580 (Texas Supreme Court, 1981)
Sun Oil Co. v. Samano
607 S.W.2d 46 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Keith v. Spratlan
530 S.W.2d 348 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Southern Roofing & Sheet Metal Co. v. Paramount Construction Co.
512 S.W.2d 781 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Hilliard v. Wilkerson
492 S.W.2d 292 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1973)
Maxey v. Citizens National Bank of Lubbock
489 S.W.2d 697 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Texas Attorney General Reports, 1967
Employers Casualty Company v. Patterson
344 S.W.2d 199 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1961)
National Aid Life of Oklahoma City v. Price
157 S.W.2d 959 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1941)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
137 S.W.2d 753, 135 Tex. 12, 1940 Tex. LEXIS 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shell-petroleum-corp-v-royal-petroleum-corp-texcommnapp-1940.