Oil and Gas Leases: Assignments; Wellbore Versus Lease Assignments: Ambiguity Statute of Frauds

摘要

See the discussion of the 2008 Wyoming Supreme Court opinion in this case for a complete recitation of the facts. After remand, the trial court determined after a bench trial that Powder River owns all of the interests underlying the entire federal oil and gas lease in question so that the Forcenergy/Comet assignment was ineffective to convey any interest. The trial court hears substantial evidence from the parties to the 1998 Assignment as to what their intent was. Held: affirmed. Comet argues that the evidence given at the trial regarding the "subjective" intent of the assignor and assignee should have been excluded. While evidence of the subjective intent of the parties to an assignment is not admissible in the absence of a finding of ambiguity, surrounding circumstances evidence relating to the pre-execution negotiations of the assignment is admissible. The testimony by the Forcenergy landman was that Forcenergy did not retain any interest in the leases after the assignment. The testimony also provided background as to why Forcenergy was divesting itself of its Rocky Mountain assets which supported the trial court's conclusion that it did not intend to retain any interests in the lease oustide of the relevant spacing unit. Why the testimony might be construed as providing the assignor's subjective intent, the court finds that when considered in its entirety the testimony is admissible surrounding circumstances evidence.