Bob Klein v. Arkoma Production

I respectfully dissent.

First, the court errs factually when it speaks of the “royalty owners’ take-or-pay claims”. Supra, at 782, 783. The only “take- or-pay claims” that existed in this case were *790those held by Arkoma against Arkla arising out of Arkla’s refusal to either take or pay pursuant to one or more of eight gas purchase contracts (the most notable of which is GPC 5239) between the two corporations. The take-or-pay claims against Arkla were always contract rights and nothing more. The take-or-pay claim in GPC 5239 was not held by the plaintiffs, and most certainly not by Jones and…