Court Opinion

ID: 2894192
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2015-09-07 22:56:40.775796+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:32:07.252296
License: Public Domain

NO. 07-04-0118-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL E

APRIL 3, 2006
______________________________

HENRY F. FIELDS, et al., 

									Appellants

v.

RICHARD A. WATERFIELD, et al., 

									Appellees
_________________________________

FROM THE 31ST DISTRICT COURT OF ROBERTS COUNTY;

NO. 1841; HON. STEVEN R. EMMERT, PRESIDING
_______________________________

On Motion for Rehearing
					      _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., REAVIS, J. and BOYD, S.J. (1)
	Pending before us are the motions for rehearing of the litigants asking that we
resolve other additional issues and that we affirm those portions of the trial court judgment 
which no one disputes.  We grant and deny the motions in part as described below.  
	To the extent that the litigants ask the court to address other issues raised in their
briefs, we conclude that the disposition of same was and is premature since each will be
affected by the validity of the pooling agreement.  In other words, if the pooling agreement
is ultimately found invalid, they become moot.  
	As to modifying our judgment to affirm those portions of the trial court judgment to
which no one has dispute, we do so.  Accordingly, we withdraw our prior judgment, affirm
those paragraphs of the trial court's judgment numbered "1," "3," "4," "10," "15," "17," and
"18," reverse the remainder of the trial court's judgment, and remand the cause for further
proceedings.  Finally, except to the extent expressly granted by this order, the motions for
rehearing are denied.

							Brian Quinn 
						          Chief Justice   
 

1. John T. Boyd, Chief Justice (Ret.), Seventh Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment.  Tex. Gov't
Code Ann. §75.002(a)(1) (Vernon 2005).