Legal Opinion · Dissent

Abella v. Knight Oil Tools

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)

Decided April 10, 1997No. 01-95-01207-CVPublished

1Dissent

HUTSON-DUNN1, Justice,

dissenting.

I respectfully dissent.

First I note that the appellees state in their first amended petition that the “security for its debt [are] the oil and gas leases.” The court’s order provided that the receiver collect the “net proceeds” from the sale of the oil and gas produced from the well. The wording of section 56.003, creating the statutory lien under which appellees claim, does not include oil and gas produced from the well or the proceeds from its sale. A lien attaches only to property specifically mentioned in the statute. Wilkins v. Fecht, 356 S.W.2d 855, 855…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Rogers v. Daniel Oil & Royalty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Bethlehem Supply Corp. v. Wotola Royalty Corp.Texas Supreme Court · 1942
  3. United States v. Texas Eastern Transmission Corp.District Court, W.D. Louisiana · 1965
  4. Wilkins v. FechtCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API