Russell v. Texas Co.

Nature of the Case

This was a dispute over a revocable license.

Facts

The Texas Company (D) received an offer from Russell (P) for a revocable license to cover the mineral use of land known as section 23. The offer called for payment of $150 per day and that Texas Company’s continued use of the roadway, water and or materials would constitute acceptance of this offer. Russell claimed title to section 23 from the Northern Pacific Railway Company through a contract followed by a warranty deed executed in 1918. In the contract and deed, there was a reservation of mineral rights by the grantor. Texas had been conducting extensive operations on section 23 since 1953 under an oil and gas lease granted by Northern. Texas rejected Russell’s offer in December, 1952 but used the section from October 30 until November 22 after notice of the offer.

Russell brought this lawsuit and the trial court awarded him $3,837.60 for use of the land as $3,600 for the revocable license and $237.50 under the terms of the mineral reservation. Texas appealed the $3,600 judgment.

Issue

May an exercise of dominion by an offeree over things that are offered to him be deemed evidence of his intent to accept in the absence of other circumstances showing a contrary intent?

Holding and Rule of Law

Yes. An exercise of dominion by an offeree over things that are offered to him may be deemed evidence of his intent to accept in the absence of other circumstances showing a contrary intent.

Russell’s offer for a license was clear and unambiguous. Texas continued to use the land and hence unequivocally came within the terms specified in the offer for acceptance. Russell was reasonably led to believe that the act of Texas was an acceptance.

Disposition

Judgment affirmed.