Elliff v. Texon Drilling Co.

Supreme Court of Texas
146 Tex. 575, 210 S.W.2d 558, 4 A.L.R.2d 191 (1948)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

The rule of capture does not absolve an operator from liability for the negligent waste or destruction of oil and gas drained from beneath an adjacent landowner's property. A landowner has a common law duty to use due care to avoid the negligent waste of minerals from a common reservoir.

Facts:

The Elliffs owned land and mineral interests over a large, shared reservoir of gas and distillate.
Texon Drilling Company operated a drilling rig on an adjacent tract of land over the same common reservoir.
In November 1936, Texon's well experienced a 'blowout' due to their negligence, which caused it to catch fire and crater.
The blowout was uncontrollable for several years, venting huge quantities of gas and distillate from the common reservoir into the atmosphere.
The cratering from Texon's blowout eventually expanded to envelop and destroy a producing well on the Elliffs' property, causing it to also blow out.
The ongoing blowouts resulted in the drainage and waste of a substantial amount of gas and distillate from under the Elliffs' land.

Procedural Posture:

The Elliffs (petitioners) sued Texon Drilling Co. (respondents) in a Texas trial court for damages resulting from a well blowout.
A jury found Texon was negligent and awarded the Elliffs damages for lost gas and distillate, as well as for surface damages.
The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the Elliffs based on the jury's verdict.
Texon, as appellant, appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals (an intermediate appellate court).
The Court of Civil Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment, holding that the rule of capture barred the Elliffs from recovering damages for the drained minerals.
The Elliffs, as petitioners, appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Texas.

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Does the rule of capture absolve a landowner from liability for the negligent waste and destruction of gas and distillate drained from beneath an adjacent landowner's property?

Opinions:

Majority - Mr. Justice Folley

No. The rule of capture does not immunize a landowner from liability for the negligent waste or destruction of gas and distillate drained from an adjoining property. In Texas, a landowner has absolute title to the oil and gas in place beneath their land, a right qualified by the rule of capture, which permits a neighbor to legally appropriate minerals that migrate to their well during legitimate production. However, this rule does not extend to negligent acts that waste the resource. The negligent waste and destruction of the Elliffs' gas was not a legitimate drainage or a lawful appropriation. Each landowner over a common pool has correlative rights and a common law duty to operate with due care to avoid injuring the rights of others by damaging the common source of supply. Because Texon breached this duty, they are liable for the damages proximately caused by their negligence, as the Elliffs never lost title to the minerals that were wrongfully dissipated.

Analysis:

This landmark decision significantly curtails the absolute application of the common law rule of capture in Texas. It establishes that the right to capture is not a right to destroy, imposing a common law duty of care on operators to prevent the negligent waste of shared resources. The case solidifies the concept of 'correlative rights,' meaning that while landowners can compete to produce from a common reservoir, they cannot do so in a reckless or lawless manner that injures their neighbors' property interests. This precedent ensures that tort principles of negligence apply to oil and gas operations, protecting mineral owners from having their property destroyed with impunity under the guise of the rule of capture.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Elliff v. Texon Drilling Co. (1948)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"

Premium Feature