Legal Opinion
Seagull Energy E & P, Inc. v. Railroad Commission
Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)
Decided March 6, 2003No. 03-02-00352-CVPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MACK KIDD, Justice.
This case is an appeal from a Railroad Commission (“the Commission”) order denying an exception to the well spacing and density field rules in the Waskom (Cotton Valley) Field. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 2001.174 (West 2000). Seagull Energy E & P, Inc. (“Seagull”) chose to shut in its gas well, which produced from only one of three gas deposits underlying its lease, and drill a second well it hoped would reach all three deposits. When the second well was unable to produce gas from the deposit in which the first well had been completed, Seagull applied for a spacing…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Texas Health Facilities Commission v. Charter Medical-Dallas, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1984
- Gulf Land Co. v. Atlantic Refining Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1939
- Texas State Board of Dental Examiners v. SizemoreTexas Supreme Court · 1988
- Sexton v. Mount Olivet Cemetery Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1986
- Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1994
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- BMW of North America, LLC v. Motor Vehicle Board & Motor Vehicle Division of the Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2003
- Seagull Energy E & P, Inc. v. Railroad CommissionTexas Supreme Court · 2007
- BMW of North America, LLC v. Motor Vehicle Board and Motor Vehicle Division of the Texas Department of Transportation And Autobahn Imports, Inc. D/B/A Autobahn Motorcars, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2003
- Jerry Bennett Masonry, Inc. v. Crossland Const. Co., Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 2005