Legal Opinion

Warren Petroleum Corporation v. Monzingo

Texas Supreme Court

Decided July 24, 1957No. A-6302PublishedCited by 47 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice Culver

The sole question here is whether after drilling operations for oil and gas have been terminated and the premises abandoned, the lessee is under an implied duty to restore the surface of the land to the condition it was in prior to the commencement of the work. We answer this question in the negative.

Respondents, Mrs. Monzingo et ah, charged the petitioner, Warren Petroleum Corporation, after abandonment of its operations, with failing to restore the surface, and leaving slush pits unfilled, ruts made by the moving of heavy equipment and a gravel road across the property constructed by lessee…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Warren Petroleum Corp. v. MartinTexas Supreme Court · 1954
  2. Gregg v. Caldwell-Guadalupe Pick-Up StationsTexas Commission of Appeals · 1926
  3. Meyer v. CoxCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1952
  4. Oceana Oil Producers, Inc. v. Portland Silo Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1951
  5. Smith v. SchusterLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1953

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

3Cited by47 opinions

  1. Brown v. LundellTexas Supreme Court · 1961
  2. Humble Oil & Refining Company v. WestTexas Supreme Court · 1974
  3. Exxon Corp. v. Pluff, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2002
  4. Sun Oil Company v. WhitakerTexas Supreme Court · 1972
  5. San Jacinto Sand Co. v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1968

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

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

Powered by the Exa API