Perlman v. Pioneer Limited Partnership
Texas Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit
918 F.2d 1244 (1990)

- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
William Perlman (plaintiff) signed an oil and gas lease with Pioneer Limited Partnership and Kendrick Cattle Company (defendants). The lease contained a force majeure clause stating that Perlman would not be held liable if his performance “is prevented or hindered by . . . inability to obtain governmental permits or approvals necessary or convenient to [Perlman’s] operations.” The lease also required Perlman to “use all reasonable efforts to remove such force majeure.” Perlman’s method for producing gas also produced substantial amounts of water. When the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (Commission) learned of Perlman’s plan to use this method, it required that Perlman conduct studies of his method so the Commission could determine whether his wells needed to be permitted as water wells. This was a standard request by the Commission. Rather than conducting the studies, however, Perlman took the position that the Commission’s requirement hindered his performance of the contract under the force majeure clause. Perlman filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that the lease was canceled pursuant to the force majeure clause. The district court found in favor of the defendants. Perlman appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per Curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 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.