Elliff v. Texon Drilling Company

Supreme Court of Texas · 1948 · Property

210 S.W.2d 558 (Tex. 1948)

Updated July 23, 2026

Propertyoil and gaslaw of capturecorrelative rightsnegligencewasteabsolute ownership in placecommon reservoir

Facts

Petitioners owned surface rights and royalty interests in two tracts in Nueces County overlying about half of a large gas and distillate reservoir, and they had a producing well on their land. Respondents drilled an offset well on adjoining land, and the well blew out, caught fire, and cratered because, the jury found, respondents negligently failed to use drilling mud of sufficient weight. The blowout eventually enveloped and destroyed petitioners' well, caused additional eruptions on petitioners' land, and over several years large quantities of gas and distillate were drained from beneath petitioners' land and dissipated into the air. The jury awarded damages for the wasted gas and distillate as well as surface and cattle damage, and the trial court entered judgment on that verdict.

Issue

Does the law of capture bar adjoining landowners from recovering damages when oil and gas are negligently drained from beneath their land and wasted after escaping through a neighbor's blowout well? More specifically, does a landowner lose all property rights in such minerals once they migrate from beneath his land when the migration and dissipation result from the neighbor's negligence?

Rule

In Texas, a landowner has absolute title to oil and gas in place beneath his land, subject to the law of capture and police regulation. The law of capture protects only reasonable and legitimate drainage and appropriation through lawful operations; it does not absolve a party from liability for negligent waste or destruction of oil and gas from a common reservoir. Each owner has correlative rights and a common-law duty to use ordinary care not to injure the common source of supply or destroy another owner's opportunity to recover his fair share.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

Rafael Boone owns a ranch outside Midland, Texas, over part of a shared gas reservoir. On adjacent land, Mesa Verde Exploration drills a well, negligently ignores pressure warnings, and a blowout causes large volumes of gas that had migrated from beneath Rafael's tract to escape into the air rather than be marketed.

If Rafael sues for the value of the gas lost from beneath his land, Mesa Verde's best defense is that the gas migrated into its wellbore first. How should the court rule?

Explanation. The majority held that a Texas landowner owns oil and gas in place, subject to the law of capture and regulation. But the law of capture protects only reasonable, legitimate drainage through lawful operations; it does not immunize negligent waste or destruction. Gas negligently blown into the air is not a proper appropriation, so the neighboring owner may recover damages proximately caused by the negligence.