# Top lease risk
**URL:** https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346
**Category:** Grady County, OK
**Created:** [March 29, 2023, 11:11pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346 "2023-03-29T23:11:20Z")
**Posts on this page:** 9
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [March 29, 2023, 11:11pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/1 "2023-03-29T23:11:20Z")
Is the lessor of a top lease at risk for personal liability if others have valid (e.g. held by production) rights that would be contested?
---
### Author:  [@M\_Barnes](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/M_Barnes)
#### Post date: [March 30, 2023, 10:38pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/2 "2023-03-30T22:38:33Z")
An attorney would have to answer that, but I would never warrant the title on a lease. Not a fan of top leases… [An Overview of Recurring and Related Issues Involving Top Leasing.pdf](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/uploads/short-url/hJ7pxfXOBhRfel9q9MJeIOjCdZC.pdf) (210.2 KB)
---
### Author:  [@Bud](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Bud)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2023, 1:40am UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/3 "2023-03-31T01:40:55Z")
Always have a “NO Warranty” statement in your lease exhibit. And Top Lease is not a good idea generally.
---
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [March 31, 2023, 4:41pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/4 "2023-03-31T16:41:12Z")
Aside from warranties, I was concerned with ancillary liabilities like interference with contractual rights. I practiced law for a long time, saw a few cases involving the concept, wondered if it might be involved here. It would make an interesting
---
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [April 4, 2023, 4:13pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/5 "2023-04-04T16:13:20Z")
A case in point is now pending in Texas Supreme Court. Point Energy v MRC Permian. Not Oklahoma and a bunch of other issues involved. Might not get to the key question re: true top leases that are contingent on validity of bottom lease.
---
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2023, 5:50pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/6 "2023-04-06T17:50:32Z")
BTW, Oklahoma does recognize the tort in general. So, interesting trails in the pathways of law.
---
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2023, 5:56pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/7 "2023-04-06T17:56:52Z")
I note that in theory a top lease cannot interfere with the bottom lease because it traditionally contains a clause making the top lease contingent on invalidity of existing leasehold rights. And that is one of the questions certified in the MRC Energy case. So, being contingent on lack of opposing rights it cannot then interfere. I think this question arises in cases of Trespass to Settle Title.
---
### Author:  [@Sylvester\_W\_Brock\_Jr](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/Sylvester_W_Brock_Jr)
#### Post date: [April 6, 2023, 6:00pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/8 "2023-04-06T18:00:04Z")
That should be Point Energy v MRC.
---
### Author:  [@system](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/u/system)
#### Post date: [June 27, 2023, 11:11pm UTC](https://www.mineralrightsforum.com/t/top-lease-risk/70346/9 "2023-06-27T23:11:21Z")
This topic was automatically closed after 90 days. New replies are no longer allowed.