Summary 2010 WY 82

Summary of Decision issued June 23, 2010

Summaries are prepared by Law Librarians and are not official statements of the Wyoming Supreme Court.

Case Name: Comet Energy Services, LLC. V. Powder River Oil & Gas Ventures, LLC.

Citation: 2010 WY 82

Docket Number: S-09-0225

Appeal from the District Court of Campbell County, the Honorable Dan R. Price, II, Judge.

Representing Comet: Thomas F. Reese of Beatty, Wozniak & Reese, Casper, Wyoming.

Representing Powder River: Blake M. Pickett of Welborn Sullivan Meck & Tooley, PC, Denver, Colorado.

Facts/Discussion: In Comet I, the Court reversed the district court’s order granting summary judgment for Powder River and remanded the matter for trial concluding that the term “leasehold estate” as used in the oil and gas assignment at issue was ambiguous and a question of fact existed as to the extent of Powder River’s ownership interest in the well and/or lease it had purchased from Forcenergy Onshore, Inc. (Forcenergy).

Admissibility of the evidence: Comet contended the district court improperly considered inadmissible evidence in concluding that the 1998 assignment gave Powder River all right and title to the lease. Specifically, Comet asserted the district court allowed testimony over its objection concerning the subjective intent of Forcenergy and Powder River when they entered into the assignment. Powder River responded that the district court properly considered evidence of the circumstances surrounding the assignment, its purpose and the commercial setting at the time. The record was clear that along with his other testimony, Mr. Baiamonte testified that it was Forcenergy’s intent to give up whatever interests and associations it held associated with the well. Viewed in isolation, the statements might be construed as evidence of Forcenergy’s subjective intent. However, when considered in the context of the entire testimony, the auction brochure and Mr. Barnes’ testimony, they were not the sort of evidence the Court found improper in Omohundro.
Statute of frauds: Comet asserted the assignment did not satisfy the statute of frauds because it did not describe the land with sufficient definiteness to locate it without recourse to oral testimony and there was no other instrument referenced in the assignment containing a sufficient description. Comet argued that Wyoming law requires either the assignment itself or another writing referenced in the assignment to provide a more definite description that that contained in the 1998 Assignment or Exhibit A. The 1998 Assignment and Exhibit A clearly identified the well and its specific location. Between the parties to the 1998 Assignment, Forcenergy and Powder River, there was no misunderstanding or uncertainty about the property being assigned. In Laverents the Court stated that the statute of frauds could not be raised by those who were neither parties nor privies to the agreement. As a privy of Forcenergy, Comet had the same legally recognized interest in the well and the lease. Having taken the position that it assigned all of its ownership and interest in the well and the lease to Powder River in 1998, Forcenergy had no interest in the well or lease. Both the vendor, Forcenergy, and the purchaser, Powder River, had fully performed leaving Comet without the statute of frauds defense.

Conclusion: The district court did not abuse its discretion in considering the testimony including Mr. Baiamonte’s entire testimony, the auction brochure and Mr. Barnes’ testimony. None of the cases cited by Comet involved a situation as in the instant case in which a vendor of property entered into a written assignment to sell all of its interest in property to another and never repudiated that assignment.

Affirmed.

J. Kite delivered the decision.

Link: http://tinyurl.com/2bmpm6s .

[SPECIAL NOTE: This opinion uses the "Universal Citation." It was given an "official" citation when it was issued. You should use this citation whenever you cite the opinion, with a P.3d parallel citation. Please note when you look at the opinion that all of the paragraphs are numbered. When you pinpoint cite to a quote, you should cite to this paragraph number rather than to any page number. If you need assistance using the Universal Citation format, please contact the Wyoming State Law Library.]