May v. INEOS USA Oil & Gas LLC

Summary

The Texas Business Court, Fourth Division, sustained defendants’ objections to exhibits submitted with plaintiffs’ summary-judgment motion. The court held that the exhibits constituted post-execution course-of-performance evidence and could not be considered to construe the unambiguous Farmout Agreement. The court struck Exhibits D through N from the summary-judgment record.

Holdings

1. When the plain language of a contract is reasonably susceptible to only one meaning, courts may not consider extrinsic course-of-performance evidence to interpret the contract.
2. Defendants' objections to Exhibits D through N were sustained, and the exhibits were stricken from the summary-judgment record.

Questions Presented

1. Whether post-execution course-of-performance evidence may be considered to construe a contract that is unambiguous.
2. Whether Plaintiffs' Exhibits D through N should be admitted into the summary-judgment record.

Disposition

other