BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC v. Randle

620 S.W.3d 380, 64 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 450 (2021)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC v. Randle

Texas Supreme Court
620 S.W.3d 380, 64 Tex. Sup. Ct. J. 450 (2021)

Facts

Lessors including Walker Randle (collectively, the lessors) (plaintiffs) executed oil-and-gas leases with Quicksilver Resources (Quicksilver). Each lease was a two-page printed form lease with an attached addendum that expressly superseded any contrary provisions in the printed lease. Under the printed lease, the lessee was required to pay gas royalties based on the gas’s market value “at the mouth of the well,” which was a calculation method that allowed deduction of postproduction costs (i.e., the costs of preparing raw gas for sale downstream). Under the addendum, the lessee was instead required to compute and pay royalties based on the “gross value received” for the gas without deducting postproduction costs. For years, Quicksilver paid gas royalties on the gross value received without deducting postproduction costs. However, BlueStone Natural Resources II, LLC (BlueStone) (defendant) subsequently acquired the leases from Quicksilver and began deducting postproduction costs in calculating gas royalties. Additionally, the leases required the lessee to pay royalties for gas sold or used off premises, but each lease’s free-use clause stated that the lessee would have free use of gas in all operations that the lessee conducted under the lease, including water injections and recovery operations. After BlueStone’s acquisition, BlueStone failed to pay royalties on gas used as plant fuel by a third-party processor and on commingled gas returned to BlueStone for use in fuel compressors on and off the leased premises. BlueStone justified not paying royalties on this plant fuel and compressor fuel by claiming that the free-use clause applied to all gas used to benefit or further the leasehold operations, regardless of whether the gas was used on or off the leased premises. The lessors’ royalty payments decreased as a result of BlueStone’s decisions, and the lessors sued BlueStone in Texas state court. The lessors claimed that BlueStone had breached the lease by deducting postproduction costs from the gas royalties and by failing to pay royalties on the plant fuel and compressor fuel. The trial court awarded judgment for the lessors, and the appellate court affirmed. BlueStone appealed to the Texas Supreme Court.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Guzman, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 806,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 806,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership