Oil and Gas Lease: Receiver

摘要

This suit by Fleetwood involves his efforts to challenge the validity of a Receiver Oil and Gas Lease owned by Chevron. Fleetwood argues that the older under which the receiver was appointed, and the subsequent lease interest sold to Chevron, is void. He asserts that the publication notice relied upon in the order is insufficient, fails to meet minimum due process standards, and is void for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff in the suit in which the order was issued failed to plead and prove a necessary element required by 52 Okla. Stat. § 522(a) (5) (i.e., that the plaintiff had acquired or had good reason to believe that he could acquire operating rights covering all mineral interests other man the interest of the defendants in the subject tract or tracts). In response, Chevron argues that the receivership is not void because the judgment roll for that proceeding establishes that the trial court had jurisdiction and that due process requirements were met, and that Fleetwood's action was filed outside the time allowed under 12 Okla. Stat. § 1031 and 1038 for challenging such proceedings. It further argues that Fleetwood's suit is an improper collateral attack on the order. The trial court rules against Fleetwood and finds mat any interest Fleetwood might have owned is subject to Chevron's lease. Held: affirmed. The Court of Appeals disagrees with the contention mat the judgment roll from the underlying lawsuit was tainted by a fatal defect because it failed to affirmatively show what active and diligent efforts were undertaken regarding service of process in the earlier proceedings. Where the record is silent upon the subject, it must be presumed to be in support of the proceedings that the court inquired into and found the existence of facts authorizing it to render the judgment which it has entered.