Eastland Court Affirms TCPA Dismissal of Slander-of-Title Claim Based on Railroad Commission Drilling Permit Applications
The Eastland Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal under the Texas Citizens Participation Act of Horizontal Development Partners' slander-of-title claim against Endeavor Energy Resources, holding that statements in drilling permit applications to the Texas Railroad Commission constituted protected petitioning activity. The court found Horizontal failed to produce clear and specific evidence that Endeavor falsely claimed ownership of deep rights or acted with malice when completing permit applications.
Background
Horizontal Development Partners, LLC brought a slander-of-title action against Endeavor Energy Resources, LP in the 142nd District Court of Midland County, alleging that Endeavor made false statements in drilling permit applications submitted to the Texas Railroad Commission regarding its title in three tracts of land. The trial court granted Endeavor's motion to dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA), and Horizontal appealed.
The TCPA Framework and Petitioning Activity
The Court of Appeals applied the TCPA's three-step burden-shifting framework. First, the movant must demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that the legal action is based on the movant's exercise of protected rights—free speech, petition, or association. If this showing is made, the burden shifts to the nonmovant to establish by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case for each essential element of the claim.
The court held that Endeavor's permit applications constituted protected petitioning activity. The court reasoned that the mineral interest owner
was not free to commence drilling operations without appropriate permits, and even if it were unclear that owner's applications were directed at a redress of a grievance, they still qualified as a petition under state constitution because they were requests that were addressed to the government for other purposes.
Failure to Establish Prima Facie Case
Having determined that the TCPA applied, the burden shifted to Horizontal to establish by clear and specific evidence a prima facie case for each essential element of slander of title. The court found that Horizontal failed to meet its prima facie burden to produce clear and specific evidence that Endeavor made false claims in the permit applications. The court further held that Horizontal failed to produce clear and specific evidence that Endeavor acted with malice in making any false claims in the permit applications.
The Court of Appeals reviewed the trial court's ruling de novo and affirmed the dismissal of Horizontal's slander-of-title claim.