• Home
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe
  • Digital Edition
  • Books
  • Events
  • Products
  • RSS Feeds

Home › This Week”s Issue › Minimize the Risk of Post-Deal Fraud Claims

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Special Report: Energy Law

Previous

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next

Minimize the Risk of Post-Deal Fraud Claims

March 4, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

As a result, the Corpus Christi/Edinburg court reversed the trial court's directed verdict. It found that the lessee's representations could form the basis of a fraud claim because they were based on past and present facts and the lessee had special knowledge of facts that would occur in the future.

Other cases demonstrate the flip side of this scenario, finding that representations concerning the prospects of production are mere opinions or predictions when the underlying data is disclosed or publicly available.

In Paull v. Capital Resource Management (1999), Austin's 3rd Court of Appeals applied this reasoning to a field summary containing predictions of future production, payout and rates of return. The 3rd Court found that those could not form the basis of a fraud claim when the wells at issue failed to produce as predicted, because the parties had equal access to the underlying information such as projected future costs, past production and production of analogous fields.

El Paso's 8th Court of Appeals also took this approach in Holland v. Thompson (2010), when it found that a fraud claim could not be based on a buyer's general statements to a mineral interest owner indicating that the wells at issue were "old" and "playing out," there was "no reason" to begin new production and he did not "foresee" any, and the field was "drained" or "used up."

Although the buyer had filed an application with the Texas Railroad Commission the year before, indicating that the buyer planned to drill additional wells in the field, the 8th Court found that the buyer did not have special knowledge concerning future drilling plans because the Railroad Commission records were equally available to both the buyer and seller.

Words to the Wise

Given these principles, here are some considerations for in-house counsel for buyers and sellers of energy assets. These may be helpful to keep in mind when company employees or contractors make representations concerning the prospects of production.

• Make available relevant data to support opinions or projections concerning future production. This, of course, is easier said than done, depending on the circumstances the buyer creates, including timing, level of sophistication and other variables.

The seller in Paull avoided a fraud claim on the ground that it based its estimate of future production on information either provided to the buyer or accessible through public records. But a seller of properties might be able to pre-empt misrepresentation claims or more easily defeat them by providing all key data underlying the production estimate.

• Conflicts between general value statements and data about past or present production can bolster fraud claims. Generalizations are subject to interpretation and misinterpretation. Thus, specificity and supporting data may derail later claims.

Data may conflict with subjective value statements about the prospects of production. That's why it's best to avoid generalized value statements, such as the field is "played out" or "used up." These could give rise to a fraud claim if an opposing expert uses past production data to show a possibility of future production.

Continue reading

Previous

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next



Subscribe to Texas Lawyer

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Capital Resource Management
  • 1st Court of Appeals
  • 8th Court of Appeals
  • 13th Court of Appeals
  • 3rd Court of Appeals
  • Texas Railroad Commission
  • Transport Insurance Co.
  • Devon Energy Corporation Holdings
  • Exxon Mobil Corporation
  • Supreme Court

Key categories

    
  • In-House Counsel and Corporate Law Departments
  • Litigation

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  2. Former State Bar of Texas Employee Pleads Guilty to Theft
    •         
      • Subscription Required
  3. Tell Stories to Handle Client Frustration
    •      
  4. Bankruptcy Booms, Energy Expands for Texas Law Firms
    •      
  5. Dismissal May Loom for Inactive Silica, Asbestos Cases
    •         
      • Subscription Required
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Three Strategies for Reducing Class Action Costs

Managing Relationships With Legal Project Management

News Corp. Hires Ex-Skadden Communications Chief Bush

Law Firm Leaders' Confidence Slipping, Says Survey

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

LegalTech West Coast to Kick Off With 'Tech Audit' Keynote

Stanford Law Builds on Role as Legal Tech Incubator

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Rothstein Bankruptcy Trustee Files New Reorganization Plan
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Bar Wants Disbarment for Former Judge
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Bar Candidate Quits N.Y. Job To Satisfy N.J. Practice Bylaw

Pro Bono Work Proposed as Condition for Bar Admission
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices

NYC Defends Police Department's Use of Stop-and-Frisk

Immigrant Investor Program Gets Watchful Eye

Judge Orders Parties to Hire Neutral Expert to Probe Facebook

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Water Warriors: Local Governments Bring Pollution Suits
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Lenders Win On Foreclosures
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Justices: Doc Interviews With Defense Are Attorney Work Product
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

 
Advertising  |  About texaslawyer.com  |  Classifieds  |  Professional Announcements  |  Register for Emails  |  Reprints
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media