Legal Opinion

Roemer Oil Co. v. Aztec Gas & Oil Corp.

Wyoming Supreme Court

Decided December 1, 1994No. 93-266PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TAYLOR, Justice.

The primary question in this appeal is whether the term “reworking” in an oil and gas operating agreement is ambiguous in meaning. The district court determined that the term was not ambiguous and that, under the terms of the agreement, appellee was entitled to summary judgment.

We reverse.

I.ISSUES

Appellant, Roemer Oil Company (Roemer), raises these issues:

1. Whether the trial court erroneously determined as a matter of law that the terms “rework” and “reworking” contained in Section 11 and Section 12 of the Model Form Operating Agreement between the parties are not ambiguous.

2.…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Clopton Rogers v. OsbornTexas Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Prudential Preferred Properties v. J and J Ventures, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1993
  3. Texstar North America, Inc. v. Ladd Petroleum Corp., Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1991
  4. Union Pacific Resources Co. v. Texaco, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1994
  5. Powder River Oil Co. v. Powder River Petroleum Corp.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1992

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Amoco Production Co. v. EM Nominee Partnership Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Cargill, Inc. v. Mountain Cement Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1995
  3. Wadi Petroleum, Inc. v. Ultra Resources, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2003
  4. Del Rossi v. DoenzWyoming Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Aztec Gas & Oil Corp. v. Roemer Oil Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1997

5 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