Graham v. Prochaska
Court of Appeals of Texas
1DissentMarialyn Barnard, Justice
Admittedly, without reference to the John Hancock/Joslin and Joslin/Powell deeds, the majority could not reach the conclusion that the 1950 deed reserved to Prochaska a floating one-half royalty interest as opposed to a fixed one-sixteenth royalty interest. Because Texas law mandates the 1950 deed be harmonized by reference only to the language within the four corners of the document, I must respectfully dissent.
Proper Interpretation of an Unambiguous Deed
I believe the majority misapplies the law pertaining to proper deed construction, resulting in an incorrect construction of the unambiguous…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Coker v. CokerTexas Supreme Court · 1983
- Luckel v. WhiteTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- Dula Dashiell Cockrell v. Texas Gulf Sulphur Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1956
- French v. Chevron U.S.A. Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1995
- Centerpoint Energy Houston Electric, L.L.P. v. Old TJC Co., Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2005
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.