Sundheim v. Reef Oil Corp.
48 State Rptr. 181, 247 Mont. 244, 806 P.2d 503 (1991)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When a lessor seeks damages for breach of the implied covenant to protect from drainage, the lessee's duty to drill an offset well arises upon receiving reasonable notice of the drainage, which can be either express notice from the lessor or constructive notice from surrounding circumstances.
Facts:
- Noel Sundheim, Bertha Sundheim, and Leona Johnson (Sundheims) are owners of mineral interests in Roosevelt County, Montana.
- In 1967, the Sundheims entered into oil and gas leases which were assigned to Woods Petroleum Corporation in 1969.
- In March 1975, Woods Petroleum completed a producing well, Sundheim No. 1, on the leasehold.
- After production declined, Woods Petroleum believed the cause was reservoir conditions and, in July 1977, ceased production and cemented the well shut.
- In July 1978, Woods Petroleum transferred the well to Reef Oil Corporation, which then entered into new three-year leases with the Sundheims that included provisions for annual delay rentals.
- A geologist hired by Reef Oil later concluded that the production decline in Sundheim No. 1 was likely caused by mechanical problems, not reservoir conditions.
- Reef Oil assigned the lease to Frank Hiestand in 1980, but no new producing wells were drilled by either party to offset drainage.
- The Sundheims allege that between 1977 and 1981, adjacent wells drained approximately 145,000 barrels of oil from their leasehold.
Procedural Posture:
- Noel Sundheim and the other lessors (Sundheims) filed a complaint in the Montana Fifteenth Judicial District Court against Reef Oil Corporation, Woods Petroleum Corporation, and Frank Hiestand.
- The defendants moved for summary judgment on all claims.
- The District Court granted summary judgment for Reef Oil and Frank Hiestand, ruling that the drainage claim was barred by lack of written notice and the development claim was barred by the Sundheims' acceptance of delay rentals.
- The District Court granted summary judgment for Woods Petroleum, ruling the claims against it were barred by the statute of limitations.
- The District Court assessed Rule 11 sanctions against the Sundheims and their attorney for misrepresenting case law.
- The Sundheims (appellants) appealed the summary judgments and the sanctions order to the Supreme Court of Montana.
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 implied covenant to protect an oil and gas leasehold from drainage require a lessor to provide express written notice to a lessee before suing for damages, even if the lessee had actual or constructive knowledge of the drainage?
Opinions:
Majority - Justice McDonough
No, a lessee's duty to drill an offset well does not strictly require express written notice from the lessor when damages are sought; the duty arises when the lessee has reasonable notice of the necessity to protect the leasehold, which can be express or constructive. The court clarified its prior holding in U.V. Industries, stating that the underlying purpose of the notice requirement is to ensure the lessee is aware of the need to protect the premises. A requirement of written notice would be an unnecessary formality if the lessee already possesses knowledge of the drainage from surrounding circumstances. Therefore, constructive notice, which is imputed when a party has knowledge of facts sufficient to prompt a prudent person to inquire, satisfies the 'reasonable notice' standard. This standard, however, applies only to actions for damages; a lessor seeking forfeiture of the lease must still provide written notice to allow the lessee an opportunity to cure the breach.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies Montana's oil and gas law by lowering a procedural barrier for lessors seeking damages for drainage. By establishing that constructive notice is sufficient, the court shifts the burden, requiring lessees to be more proactive in monitoring and protecting leaseholds from drainage rather than passively waiting for a formal demand from the lessor. The case distinguishes the notice requirements based on the remedy sought—a less formal 'reasonable notice' for damages versus a strict 'written notice' for lease forfeiture. This creates a more equitable standard in damage claims and will likely influence how lessees manage their operational awareness and how future drainage disputes are litigated.
Unlock the full brief for Sundheim v. Reef Oil Corp.