century doctrine in Texas

2018"If the record fails to show strict compliance with the rules relating to the issuance, service, and return of citation, error is apparent on the face of the record, and the attempted service of process is invalid." Bank of N.Y. , 456 S.W.3d at 631 ; see also Wilson v. Dunn , 800 S.W.2d 833 , 836 (Tex. 1990) ("For well over a century the rule has been firmly established in this state that a default judgment cannot withstand direct attack by a defendant who complains that he was not served in strict compliance with applicable requirements.").

2015Co. of Texas, 259 S.W.3d 358 (2008) statutory notice requirements, Methodist only complied with motions, the trial court granted Mid–Century's motion for two.

1970Our conception of appellant’s position here is that the initial subdivision of the 17.8 acre tract is in derogation of Rule 37; however, appellant further contends that the Century rule, if applicable here, has been modified and subjected to the exception announced by the Supreme Court in Railroad Commission v. Williams, 163 Tex. 370 , 356 S.W.2d 131 (1961).

1970Our conception of appellant’s position here is that the initial subdivision of the 17.8 acre tract is in derogation of Rule 37; however, appellant further contends that the Century rule, if applicable here, has been modified and subjected to the exception announced by the Supreme Court in Railroad Commission v. Williams, 163 Tex. 370 , 356 S.W.2d 131 (1961).

1961Petroleum Corporation, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 150 , writ ref., N.R.E., where we held, in reviewing an order of the Commission that a reconstructed tract, under the Century doctrine, 2 was entitled to a *393 well, leaving the rights of the owners to bq settled in a judicial proceeding. .This was subsequently done in a suit between the parties. 155 Tex. 221 , 285 S.W.2d 201 . • We believe that the answer to Coloma is found in the decisions discussing and deciding whether or not there has been an unlawful subdivision of a tract of land in order to avoid the spacing rules of the Commission.

1961Petroleum Corporation, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 150 , writ ref., N.R.E., where we held, in reviewing an order of the Commission that a reconstructed tract, under the Century doctrine, 2 was entitled to a *393 well, leaving the rights of the owners to bq settled in a judicial proceeding. .This was subsequently done in a suit between the parties. 155 Tex. 221 , 285 S.W.2d 201 . • We believe that the answer to Coloma is found in the decisions discussing and deciding whether or not there has been an unlawful subdivision of a tract of land in order to avoid the spacing rules of the Commission.

1961Petroleum Corporation, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 150 , writ ref., N.R.E., where we held, in reviewing an order of the Commission that a reconstructed tract, under the Century doctrine, 2 was entitled to a *393 well, leaving the rights of the owners to bq settled in a judicial proceeding. .This was subsequently done in a suit between the parties. 155 Tex. 221 , 285 S.W.2d 201 . • We believe that the answer to Coloma is found in the decisions discussing and deciding whether or not there has been an unlawful subdivision of a tract of land in order to avoid the spacing rules of the Commission.

1961Petroleum Corporation, Tex.Civ.App., 219 S.W.2d 150 , writ ref., N.R.E., where we held, in reviewing an order of the Commission that a reconstructed tract, under the Century doctrine, 2 was entitled to a *393 well, leaving the rights of the owners to bq settled in a judicial proceeding. .This was subsequently done in a suit between the parties. 155 Tex. 221 , 285 S.W.2d 201 . • We believe that the answer to Coloma is found in the decisions discussing and deciding whether or not there has been an unlawful subdivision of a tract of land in order to avoid the spacing rules of the Commission.

1961In Railroad Commission of Texas v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 151 Tex. 51 , 245 S.W.2d 488, 489 , the Court stated: “ * * * after the promulgation of the Railroad Commission’s, spacing rule, owners of a single tract cannot, by their voluntary act, subdivide the tract, through leases or otherwise, and create for themselves, or those claiming under them, the right to additional drilling permits on small strips of land, under exceptions to a spacing rule relating to the protection of vested rights, because to permit them to do so would set at naught Rule 37 and the Conservation laws of Texas. * *

1961In Railroad Commission of Texas v. Humble Oil & Refining Co., 151 Tex. 51 , 245 S.W.2d 488, 489 , the Court stated: “ * * * after the promulgation of the Railroad Commission’s, spacing rule, owners of a single tract cannot, by their voluntary act, subdivide the tract, through leases or otherwise, and create for themselves, or those claiming under them, the right to additional drilling permits on small strips of land, under exceptions to a spacing rule relating to the protection of vested rights, because to permit them to do so would set at naught Rule 37 and the Conservation laws of Texas. * *

1960The Century doctrine, referred to by appellee, was first pronounced in Railroad Commission of Texas v. Magnolia Petroleum Co., 130 Tex. 484 , 109 S.W.2d 967 .

1960The Century doctrine, referred to by appellee, was first pronounced in Railroad Commission of Texas v. Magnolia Petroleum Co., 130 Tex. 484 , 109 S.W.2d 967 .