Carpenter v. Antero Resources Appalachian Corp.

Citations

• 2022 Ohio 4619

Syllabus

CIVIL – summary judgment Civ.R. 56 de novo review oil and gas lease Marketable Title Act (\MTA\) Dormant Mineral Act (\DMA\) breach of warranty claim damages the Carpenters failed to show that the trial court's decision to award attorney's fees to Antero was an abuse of discretion the Carpenters did not assert a claim under the MTA in their complaint this court will not address arguments not properly raised before the trial court in any event, the trial court did not err in denying the Carpenters' untimely cross-motion for summary judgment the Carpenters' arguments on appeal are completely different from the arguments they made to the trial court with respect to their DMA claim the Carpenters are not entitled to raise new arguments for the first time on appeal in any event, the record reveals that the Carpenters failed to exercise reasonable diligence prior to publishing a notice of intent to abandon under R.C. 5301.56(E)(1) cross-assignments of error the trial court's decision denying the Offenberger Group's motion for leave to amend their counterclaim to assert an additional claim arising under the MTA did not amount to an abuse of discretion the individual defendants' motion for summary judgment under the MTA with respect to Property B failed as a matter of law because none of the title transactions prior to 2007 constituted a legitimate root of title deed under R.C. 5301.47(E) conditional cross-assignment of error moot App.R. 12(A)(1)(c) judgments affirmed.