Union Producing Co. v. Sanborn

194 F. Supp. 121, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4263
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Texas
DecidedFebruary 10, 1961
DocketCiv. A. No. 2764
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 194 F. Supp. 121 (Union Producing Co. v. Sanborn) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Union Producing Co. v. Sanborn, 194 F. Supp. 121, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4263 (E.D. Tex. 1961).

Opinion

SHEEHY, Chief Judge.

This is an interpleader suit with jurisdiction of this Court being invoked under the provisions of 28 U.S.C.A. § 1335. The plaintiff is a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Delaware. Most of the defendants are residents and citizens of the State of Texas. However, those of the defendants who do not reside in the State of Texas reside in and are citizens of various states other than either the State of Texas or the State of Delaware. The defendants, Richard Herndon, Heather Herndon McHenry, et vir, Patrick E. McHenry, Robert Herndon, William Herndon, Lola K. Herndon, Hugh Herndon, III, Louise Herndon Riegel, William S. (Billie) Herndon, William Sydney Herndon, Grace Herndon Patten, individually and as independent executrix of the Estates of J. H. Herndon, deceased, and Sallie Olivia Herndon, deceased, Elizabeth Herndon Potter and Neva Jane Herndon will hereinafter be referred to as the Herndon Group defendants. The remainder of the defendants, namely, Eunice Garrett Sanborn, et vir, S. G. Sanborn, Aber Box and Basket Factory, a partnership, and the individual members thereof, namely, Glenn Haberle, Dell Haberle, a feme sole, Francis L. Haberle and Fredda Love Mason, a widow, the City of Jacksonville, Texas, a municipal corporation, Claudia Love Pinkard, a feme sole, Anna Love Smith, et vir, W. R. Smith, Gladys Love Berkey, et vir, Paul A. Berkey, Ninnie Love O’Neal, a feme sole, Hubert H. Love, Jr., and Annie B. Love, a feme sole, will hereinafter be referred to as the Sanborn Group defendants.

The facts found are as hereinafter stated.

Plaintiff is and has for some time been the owner of the oil, gas and mineral' leasehold estate in and under a tract of land containing 146.21 acres out of the Don Thomas Quevado Survey, Cherokee County, Texas, being the same tract described in a deed from J. H. Herndon, executor of the estate of W. S. Herndon, deceased, to Wesley Love, dated January 12, 1904, and recorded in Volume 29, page 491 of the Deed Records of Cherokee County, Texas,1 plaintiff having acquired an oil, gas and mineral lease covering said tract from each of the defendants. The oil and gas lease the plaintiff acquired from Claudia Love Pinkard, a widow, Ninnie Love O’Neal, a widow, Anna Love Smith, et vir, W. R. Smith, Gladys Love Berkey, et vir, Paul A. Berkey, Hubert Love, Jr., and Annie B. Love, a widow, contains a royalty provision calling for the payment of one-fourth of the market value at the wellhead of gas produced and sold from the leased premises. The leases plaintiff acquired from the remainder of the defendants contain royalty provisions calling for the pay[123]*123ment of one-eighth of the market value at the wellhead of gas produced, saved and sold from the leased premises.

Pursuant to authorization contained in the leases that plaintiff acquired from the defendants, the plaintiff, by instrument dated August 7, 1957, formed the “Union Producing Company’s Graham Unit” for the purposes of drilling for and producing gas, condensate (sometime called distillate) and other liquid hydrocarbons, except oil. Said Unit as formed contains 629.71 acres and includes all of the 146.21 acre tract above mentioned. After creating such Unit, the plaintiff drilled and completed a well on said Unit which is producing gas and condensate in commercial quantities. Although said well is not located on the 146.21 acre tract, same is located within the limits of the Unit so that royalties attributable to the true owners of the oil, gas and other minerals under the said 146.21 acre tract become due upon production of gas and condensate from said well.

The Herndon Group defendants claim title to the entire mineral estate, including oil and gas, in and under the 146.21 acre tract in question subject to the oil and gas leases covering said tract executed by them and now held by plaintiff. On the other hand, the Sanborn Group defendants claim title to the entire mineral estate, including oil and gas, in and under the 146.21 acre tract subject to the oil and gas leases covering said tract executed by them and now held by plaintiff. The Aber Box and Basket Factory claims title to the mineral estate in and under a 27.01 acre tract out of the 146.21 acre tract subject to the oil and gas lease executed by it and held by plaintiff covering said 27.01 acre tract.2 The City of Jacksonville, Texas, claims title to the mineral estate in and under a 26.79 acre tract out of the said 146.21 acre tract subject to an oil and gas lease covering said 26.79 acre tract executed by it and held by plaintiff.3 Eunice Garrett Sanborn and husband, S. G. Sanborn, claim title to the mineral estate in and under a 65.83 acre tract out of the said 146.21 acre tract subject to an oil and gas lease covering said 65.83 acre tract executed by them and owned by plaintiff.4 Claudia Love Pinkard, Anna Love Smith and husband, W. R. Smith, Gladys Love Berkey and husband, Paul A. Berkey, Ninnie Love O’Neal, Hubert H. Love, Jr. and Annie B. Love claim title to the mineral estate in and under a 26.50 acre tract out of said 146.21 acre tract subject to an oil and gas lease covering said 26.50 acre tract executed by them and held by plaintiff.5 Because of the conflicting claims to the mineral estate made by the Herndon Group defendants on the one hand and the Sanborn Group defendants on the other hand, the [124]*124plaintiff has not paid to the defendants, or any of them, or to anyone else, the royalties attributable to the owners of the oil, gas and other minerals in and under the 146.21 acre tract by virtue of the production by plaintiff of gas and condensate from the well it drilled and is producing on its “Graham Unit.”

At the time this suit was instituted on February 18, 1960, the plaintiff was obligated to pay to the true owners of the oil, gas and other minerals under the 146.21 acre tract as royalty because of the gas and distillate produced from its well on the “Graham Unit” a sum greatly in excess of $500. Upon the filing of this suit, plaintiff deposited into the registry of this Court the sum of $7,047.15 representing an amount sufficient to pay the full amount of the royalty due the true owners of the mineral estate in and under the 146.21 acre tract through December 31, 1959, including the one-fourth royalty provided for in the lease executed by Claudia Love Pinkard, et al., above referred to. The plaintiff has continued to deposit into the registry of this Court from month to month the royalties that have accrued to the true owners of the mineral estate under said 146.21 acre tract from and after December 31, 1959, by virtue of the production from the well on the “Graham Unit.” Plaintiff has requested that the Court determine the true owners of the mineral estate in and under said 146.21 acre tract in order that it might make payment of the royalties due the owners of said mineral estate to the parties legally entitled thereto.

On November 22, 1901, W. S. Herndon,, the then owner of the above mentioned 146.21 acre tract, executed a Bond for Title to Joe A. Sanders binding and obligating the said W. S. Herndon, his heirs,, executors and administrators to convey said tract to the said Joe A. Sanders upon, the payment of certain consideration. This Bond for Title, which was filed for record in the Deed Records of Cherokee County, Texas, on February 15,1904, and', is recorded in Volume 29, page 491 of said Deed Records provides in part as-follows:

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

Related

McSweyn v. Musselshell County, Mont.
632 P.2d 1095 (Montana Supreme Court, 1981)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
194 F. Supp. 121, 1961 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4263, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-producing-co-v-sanborn-txed-1961.