Legal Opinion

Valence Operating Co. v. Texas Genco, LP

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)

Decided February 27, 2008No. 10-06-00252-CVPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BILL VANCE, Justice.

In this accommodation doctrine case, Appellee Texas Genco, LP sought a permanent injunction to prevent Appellant Valence Operating Co. from drilling Well No. 9 of its Holmes “A” Gas Unit 1 within cells 8 and 12 of Texas Genco’s ash-disposal landfill. Valence, which has mineral rights in the Holmes Unit, obtained a per mit from the Railroad Commission to drill Well 9 as a 297-foot directional well (referred to by the parties and in this opinion as the 300-foot directional well). The trial court entered a temporary injunction, and Valence counterclaimed for damages…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. City of Keller v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  3. Maritime Overseas Corp. v. EllisTexas Supreme Court · 1998
  4. Crown Life Insurance Company v. CasteelTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  5. Harris County v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 2002

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Key Operating & Equipment, Inc. v. Will Hegar and Loree Hegar, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2013
  2. Homer Merriman v. XTO Energy, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2011
  3. Key Operating & Equipment, Inc. v. Will Hegar and Loree Hegar, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2013
  4. Key Operating & Equipment, Inc. v. Will Hegar and Loree Hegar, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2013
  5. Key Operating & Equipment, Inc. v. Will Hegar and Loree Hegar, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2013

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

Powered by the Exa API