Court Opinion

ID: 9645849
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 21:37:08.768722+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:32.232685
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellants in their motion for a rehearing have called to our attention that in line two of page 4 of our original opinion [334 S.W.2d 212], we stated that “the original deed provided that George Beggs should have the exclusive right to lease the tract conveyed, * * when in fact such provision is found in the escrow agreement. We are glad to acknowledge this error and to stand corrected.
The provision contained in the escrow agreement reads as follows:
“It is further understood and agreed that in case said title by virtue of the premises, vests in the said George Beggs, than and in that event the said parties of the first part shall be entitled to one-half of all the oil, gas and other minerals in, underlying and that may be produced from said land described in said deed, with the express understanding however that the said George Beggs shall have the power and he is hereby constituted our attorney-in-fact, to execute oil and gas leases thereon, royalty deeds with reference thereto, and to make any and all contracts necessary and proper for the management and control of said mineral interests, which management and control shall ■ and is hereby vested in said party of the second part.”
We have carefully considered appellants’ motion for a rehearing and, with the exception of the above correction, it is in all things overruled.