July 5, 2020

Volume X, Number 187

July 03, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Lessee Could Not Force Joinder of Neighboring Landowners in Texas Royalty Suit

On February 3, 2017, the Texas Supreme Court issued an opinion in Richard D. Crawford v. XTO Energy, Inc. finding that a lessee could not require a lessor to join neighboring landowners because the adjacent landowners did not “claim an interest relating to the subject of the action.”

XTO Energy, Inc. (“XTO”) was paying adjacent landowners royalty interests based on a title opinion advising that the common-law strip-and-gore-doctrine applied.  However, Richard Crawford, a lessor, believed he was entitled to the royalties and sued XTO.  The trial court dismissed the case when Crawford did not join the adjacent landowners.  A divided court of appeals affirmed, concluding that the adjacent landowners had a pecuniary interest in the outcome of the suit.

The Texas Supreme Court found that the adjacent landowners were not necessary parties.  Although the adjacent landowners may have had a claim to the minerals pursuant to the strip-and-gore doctrine, the record was devoid of evidence showing that any of the landowners had ever demanded or asserted ownership of a royalty interest.

In sum, joinder is only required where the parties to be joined “claim an interest relating to the subject of the action.”  This case is unusual in that most royalty dispute cases involve an absent party with an express claim of interest.  While this case is unique, it should serve as a reminder that a lessee may only force a lessor to join an absent party if they are claiming an interest.  Alternatively, in order to avoid multiple suits over the same royalty payouts, a lessee must join parties pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.      

© Steptoe & Johnson PLLC. All Rights Reserved.National Law Review, Volume VII, Number 45


About this Author

Christina A. Denmark, Energy Attorney, Steptoe & Johnson Law Firm
Of Counsel

Christina Denmark focuses her practice in the areas of energy and mineral title law.  Ms. Denmark brings unique experience to her practice in the energy department, as she previously was a trial attorney who concentrated her practice on the defense of toxic tort and personal injury claims.  She handled litigation claims for individuals and companies, as well as acted as national coordinating counsel.