Court Opinion

ID: 9834034
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:14:59.451809+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:11.033376
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
We were in error in saying that the defense of abandonment by appellants was waived by the plaintiffs by reason of their failure to request the same be submitted to the jury. While there was no request for submission of that issue and the same was not submitted, the defense was not waived' because we find in the record an exception sustained by the trial court to that plea.
However, we adhere to the conclusion reached that there was no merit in the plea of waiver, since,' as stated in our original opinion, E. S. Graham had the legal title to all the oil and gas located in the land covered by the deed shown in Exhibit D, and such title could not be lost merely by abandonment, contrary to our statutes requiring conveyances of real estate to be in writing. See Phillips v. J. B. Watkins Hand-Mortgage Co., 90 Tex. 195, 38 S. W. 270, 470, and authorities there cited; Rev. Stats, of 1925, arts. 1288, 3995.
We adhere to the construction of the deed shown in Exhibit D as appears in our opinion on original hearing; and we believe the conclusions we reached are further supported by the opinion of the Commission of Appeals in the recent case of Reynolds v. McMan Oil & Gas Co., adopted by the Supreme Court, reported in 11 S.W:(2d) 778.
With the correction noted above, the motion for rehearing is overruled.