Lundin/Weber Co. LLC v. Brea Oil Co., Inc.

Good Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 3d 768·117 Cal. App. 4th 427·2004 Cal. App. LEXIS 435·2004 Daily Journal DAR 4056·160 Oil & Gas Rep. 855
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 1, 2004F042604California3,154 words

Opinion

Opinion

Dawson, J.

Appellant The LundinAVeber Company LLC (LundinAVeber) contends that an order granting summary adjudication as to seven of its causes of action was erroneous because California should recognize an implied covenant for further exploration in oil and gas leases. Respondent Brea Oil Company (Brea) argues that it fully complied with the express terms of the oil and gas leases which defined its responsibilities to drill wells in the search for oil and gas on the leased property, and that an implied covenant for further exploration is contrary to the express terms of the leases.

Based on the undisputed facts presented with the motion for summary adjudication, we conclude that a covenant for further exploration should not be implied in the two oil and gas leases involved in this case. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

UNDISPUTED FACTS RELIED UPON BY THE PARTIES

The following are all of the material facts the parties presented to the superior court in their separate statements of undisputed facts concerning the motion for summary adjudication. None of the facts asserted by either party were disputed.

LundinAVeber is the current lessor, and Brea is the current lessee,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.