Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. 1992). · Go Syfert
Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. 1992). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
29 citation events (27 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: FPL Farming Ltd. v. Environmental Processing Systems, L.C. (texapp, 2009-10-29)
Treatment trajectory · 1995 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1995 2010 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) FPL Farming Ltd. v. Environmental Processing Systems, L.C.
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
The Geo Viking opinion on rehearing stated: "In denying petitioner's application for writ of error, we should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinions of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing.” Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., 839 S.W.2d 797, 798 (Tex.1992) (per cu-riam op. withdrawn on reh’g). 5 .
discussed Cited as authority (rule) FPL Farming Ltd. v. Environmental Processing Systems, L.C.
Tex. App. · 2009 · confidence medium
The Geo Viking opinion on rehearing stated: "In denying petitioner's application for writ of error, we should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinions of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing." Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co. , 839 S.W.2d 797, 798 (Tex. 1992) (per curiam op. withdrawn on reh'g). 5.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Coastal Oil & Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust (2×)
Tex. · 2008 · confidence medium
Once these wells are abandoned and plugged, Texas will lose access to this valuable natural resource." TEXAS ENERGY PLANNING COUNCIL, supra note 15, at 15. [77] 817 S.W.2d at 359 , on reh'g, 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex.1992). [78] 839 S.W.2d at 797. [79] Ernest E.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mission Resources, Inc. v. Garza Energy Trust
Tex. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Initially, the supreme court reversed the Texarkana court, stating that fracing beyond lease lines did constitute subsurface trespass, Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., No. D-1678, 1992 WL 80263 , at *1, 1992 Tex. LEXIS 40 , *1 (Tex.1992) (per curiam); however, the court later withdrew its opinion, denied the writ, and stated: ‘We should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinion of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing.” Geo Viking, 839 S.W.2d at 798.
discussed Cited "see" William Sciscoe, Denise Sciscoe, Eric Dow, Angela Dow, Robert Draper, Michelle Draper, John Harris, Kimberly Harris, Charles Pegg, Geraldine Pegg, Cody Petree, Alice Randall, Johnny Reames, Jeannette Reames, Margaret Wagner, Jane Wagner, and Town of DISH v. Enbridge Gathering (North Texas) L.P., Atmos Energy Corporation, Energy Transfer Fuel, L.P., Enterprise Texas Pipeline, L.L.C., Texas Midstream Gas Services, L.L.C.
Tex. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Company, 839 S.W.2d 797, 798 (Tex. 1992) (on reh‟g) (stating that its decision “should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinions of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing”).
discussed Cited "see" Sciscoe v. Texas)
Tex. App. · 2015 · signal: see · confidence high
See Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Company, 839 S.W.2d 797, 798 (Tex. 1992) (on reh’g) (stating that its decision “should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinions of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing”).
cited Cited "see" Matador Production Company v. Weatherford Artificial Lift Systems, Inc.
Tex. App. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., 817 S.W.2d 357, 359 (Tex. App.-Texarkana 1991), writ denied, 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. 1992) (per curiam).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dixon v. Modelist (2×)
Tex. App. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence low
Helena Chem. v. Wilkins, 47 S.W.3d 486, 505 (Tex.2001); see also Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex.-Lee Operating Co., 817 S.W.2d 357, 360-61 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 1991) (holding evidence was sufficient to support award of future damages for improperly drilled well), writ dism’d, improvidently granted, 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex.1992). 2 This principle recognizes that a party to a contract who properly claims future damages has been harmed in a current, real sense, in that his or her expectations regarding the contract have been diminished.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Joseph Dixon D/B/A Dixon Concrete Contractors v. Shelton R. Modelist
Tex. App. · 2004 · signal: see also · confidence low
Helena Chem. v. Wilkins , 47 S.W.3d 486, 505 (Tex. 2001); see also Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex.-Lee Operating Co. , 817 S.W.2d 357, 360-61 (Tex. App. C Texarkana 1991) (holding evidence was sufficient to support award of future damages for improperly drilled well), writ dism = d, improvidently granted , 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. 1992). [2] This principle recognizes that a party to a contract who properly claims future damages has been harmed in a current, real sense, in that his or her expectations regarding the contract have been diminished.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Kerr-Mcgee Corporation v. Jimmy Helton
Tex. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g. , GEO Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co. , 817 S.W.2d 357, 363 (Tex. App. B Texarkana 1991), writ denied , 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex. 1992) (per curiam ); Vega Petroleum Corp. v. Hovey , 604 S.W.2d 388, 390 (Tex. Civ .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Kerr-McGee Corp. v. Helton (2×)
Tex. · 2004 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Geo Viking, Inc. v. Tex-Lee Operating Co., 817 S.W.2d 357, 363 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1991), imit denied, 839 S.W.2d 797 (Tex.1992) (per curiam); Vega Petroleum Corp. v. Hovey, 604 S.W.2d 388, 390 (Tex. Civ.App.-Eastland 1980, no writ); Wes-Tex Land Co. v. Simmons, 566 S.W.2d 719, 722-23 (Tex.Civ.App.-Eastland 1978, writ refd n.r.e.).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
GEO VIKING, INC., Petitioner,
v.
TEX-LEE OPERATING COMPANY, Respondent
D-1678.
Texas Supreme Court.
Dec 9, 1992.
839 S.W.2d 797
Per Curiam.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
[*798] PER CURIAM.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

The motions for rehearing are overruled. The per curiam opinion and judgment of this court issued April 22, 1992 are withdrawn. Further, the order of this court of April 22, 1992, granting the application for writ of error is withdrawn, as the application was improvidently granted.

In denying petitioner’s application for writ of error, we should not be understood as approving or disapproving the opinions of the court of appeals analyzing the rule of capture or trespass as they apply to hydraulic fracturing.