Texas Outfitters Limited, LLC v. Nicholson

572 S.W.3d 647 (2019)

From our private database of 46,400+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Texas Outfitters Limited, LLC v. Nicholson

Texas Supreme Court
572 S.W.3d 647 (2019)

Facts

Dora Jo Carter owned the surface estate of a Texas ranch. Dora Jo and her children, Carolyn Nicholson and William Carter, Jr. (collectively with Dora Jo, the Carters) (plaintiffs), owned a 50-percent interest in the mineral estate underlying the ranch. The Hindeses owned the other 50-percent mineral interest. In 2002, the Carters sold the surface estate to Texas Outfitters Limited, LLC (Texas Outfitters) (defendant). The Carters also sold Texas Outfitters a 4.16-percent mineral interest and the executive right to lease the Carters’ remaining 45.84-percent mineral interest. Texas Outfitters’ owner, Frank Fackovec (defendant), used the ranch for a hunting business. The Hindeses subsequently leased their 50-percent mineral interest to El Paso Oil Exploration & Production Company (El Paso) for a $1,750-per-acre bonus and 25-percent royalty. El Paso made the same offer to Texas Outfitters for the other 50-percent mineral interest. The Carters wanted to accept the offer, but Fackovec rejected it because he believed the bonus was too low. The Carters sued Texas Outfitters and Fackovec, asserting that by rejecting the offer, Texas Outfitters had breached the duty of utmost good faith and fair dealing that Texas Outfitters owed as the holder of the executive rights to the mineral estate. At trial, Dora Jo testified that Fackovec had told her that he planned not to lease the minerals because of his hunting business on the ranch. The trial court found that Fackovec had gambled with Texas Outfitters’ interest and the Carters’ much larger interest by holding out for a higher bonus, even though Fackovec knew that the Carters wanted to take El Paso’s offer and that the pool of potential future lessees was smaller because the Hindeses had already leased their interest to El Paso. The court also found that rejecting the offer protected and benefited Texas Outfitters’ surface interest in the ranch to the Carters’ detriment. The court awarded the Carters the amount that they would have received in bonuses had Texas Outfitters accepted El Paso’s lease offer. Texas Outfitters appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Lehrmann, 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 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  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.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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 832,000 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
  • 46,400 briefs - keyed to 994 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