Hlavinka v. Hancock’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 23rd Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Garza v. Alviar · Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Havner · BMC Software Belgium, NV v. Marchand · Kindred v. Con/Chem, Inc. · Plas-Tex, Inc. v. U.S. Steel Corp.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Testimony at trial established that surrounding landowners had received greater consideration- for executing oil and gas leases than was being offered to the Hlavinkas. The Hlavinkas, admittedly not experienced in oil and gas lease transactions, attempted to acquire lease terms equal to or above the market value of the surrounding land owners. This was not a case where the Hlavinkas were arbitrarily refusing to lease under any circumstances. The record reflects that just prior to suit being filed against them, the Hlavinkas were willing to negotiate with Adobe and were asking for $650.00 an acre. Thus, the record .shows that the Hlavinkas were willing to lease and were seeking terms similar to those obtained by neighboring land owners.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[u]ntil Manges , the utmost-good-faith standard had not been considered to create a fiduciary duty. See Mims v. Beall, 810 S.W.2d 876, 878 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1991, no writ). Cases interpreting the Manges decision have concluded that when the executive and non-executive are co-tenants in the mineral estate and there is a relationship of trust and confidence between the parties, a fiduciary relationship exists between the executive and the non-executive mineral interest owner. See Marathon Oil Co. v. Moye, 898 S.W.2d 585, 591 (Tex.App.Dallas 1994, orig. proceeding); Pickens v. Hope, 764 S.W.2d 256, 267 (Tex.App.San Antonio 1988, writ denied).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.