Reynolds-Rexwinkle Oil, Inc. v. Petex, Inc.
Kansas Supreme Court
1 P.3d 909 (2000)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Herman and Loretta Schippers issued an oil and gas lease that was later acquired by Reynolds-Rexwinkle Oil, Inc. (Reynolds) (plaintiff). The lease was to expire on February 5, 1994. In May 1993, Reynolds assigned its interests in the lease to Petex, Inc. (Petex) (defendant), save for a 1.5% royalty: “The Assignor herein hereby expressly excepts, reserves, and retains title to an undivided 1.5% of 8/8ths of all [minerals] from the described land under the provisions of the [Schippers] lease, or any extension or renewal thereof, as an overriding royalty, free and clear of any costs and expense of the development and operation thereof, excepting taxes applicable to said interest and the production therefrom.” In August 1993, before the lease expired, the Schipperses and Petex executed a new oil and gas lease with substantially the same terms as the lease that Reynolds had assigned. This top lease was to take effect, and did take effect, on February 6, 1994, or the day after the original lease expired. In November 1994, Petex drilled a producing well on the property. Reynolds demanded payment based on its claimed overriding 1.5% royalty interest. Petex claimed that Reynolds’s interest had expired with the original lease. Reynolds brought suit. The trial court granted Reynolds summary judgment. The court of appeals reversed. Reynolds appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Larson, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 789,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 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.