Court Opinion

ID: 9773167
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:38:53.526415+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:50.523248
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
On Motion for Rehearing, Pend Or-eille calls our attention to the fact that a dispute exists concerning title that would effect distribution of royalty payments from the Geffert No. 1 Well. We agree and grant Pend Oreille’s motion for rehearing concerning this point. Tex.Nat.Res. Code Ann. § 91.403(b)(1) (Vernon Supp. 1990), provides that interest is not applicable on payments that are withheld or suspended because of “a dispute concerning title that would effect distribution of payments”.
The subject matter of the lawsuit and the evidence shows that Pend Oreille disputed Jones’ title to the royalty payments from the Geffert No. 1 Well. Based on this title dispute, Pend Oreille refused to pay Jones these royalties. We therefore render judgment that Jones is not entitled to an award of statutory prejudgment interest on these royalties. See Tex.Nat.Res.Code Ann. § 91.403(b)(1) (Vernon Supp.1990). The trial court’s judgment is reformed to delete the $41,518.78 award of statutory prejudg*451ment interest. In all other respects the motions for rehearing are overruled.