This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In the 1920s—the time the deed at issue was executed—lessors commonly reserved a one-eighth royaltyinterest when they executed oil and gas leases. In addition to the estate misconception theory, the Court analyzed the “legacy of the one-eighth royalty.” Dils Co. , 2d 904 (Tex. Dawkins , 483 S.W.3d
While 30:10 was amended during the 2022 legislative session, the amendment preserved the limited obligation of remitting the royalty and overriding royalty burdens to the nonparticipating owner for the benefit of the royalty and overriding royalty owners. Perhaps time will tell.
The lessees owned working interests in certain oil and gas leases that were executed in 2007. The leases contained the following royalty provisions: 3. The lessees paid royalties to the lessors based on their gross proceeds. This became a point of contention with the lessors.
In Eagle II , TRO-X alleged that Eagle failed to pay TRO-X its share of income generated from production on the equitable interests. Factual and Procedural Background TRO-X and Eagle entered into an agreement to buy and sell certain leases, sharing the cash and mineral interest proceeds derived from such sales (the “Agreement”).
In Eagle II , TRO-X alleged that Eagle failed to pay TRO-X its share of income generated from production on the equitable interests. TRO-X and Eagle entered into an agreement to buy and sell certain leases, sharing the cash and mineral interest proceeds derived from such sales (the “Agreement”). Analysis and Holding. Res Judicata.
The equity for these LLCs is known as “membership interests” but may be referred to in the LLC operating agreement as “units”. Many LLC operating agreements provide for the issuance of additional membership interests or units, but may not provide for the issuance of a different class of membership interests or units.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content