Jacklin Romeo, Susan S. Rine, and Debra Snyder Miller v. Antero Resources Corporation
West Virginia Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA
January 2025 Term FILED
_____________________ June 11, 2025
released at 3:00 p.m.
C. CASEY FORBES, CLERK
No. 23-589 SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS
OF WEST VIRGINIA
_____________________
JACKLIN ROMEO, SUSAN S. RINE, and DEBRA SNYDER MILLER,
Plaintiffs Below, Petitioners,
v.
ANTERO RESOURCES CORPORATION,
Defendant Below, Respondent.
___________________________________________________________
Certified Questions from the
United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia
The Honorable Thomas S. Kleeh, Chief Judge
Civil Action No. 1:17-CV-88-TSK-MJA
CERTIFIED QUESTIONS ANSWERED
_________________________________________________________
Rehearing Granted: December 31, 2024
Submitted Upon Rehearing: April 22, 2025
Filed: June 11, 2025
George A. Barton, Esq. W. Henry Lawrence, Esq.
Barton and Burrows, LLC Amy M. Smith, Esq.
Mission, Kansas Lauren K. Turner, Esq.
Steptoe & Johnson PLLC
L. Lee Javins II Esq. Bridgeport, West Virginia
Taylor M. Norman, Esq.
Bailey, Javins & Carter, L.C. Elbert Lin, Esq.
Charleston, West Virginia Hunton Andrews Kurth LLP
Richmond, Virginia
Howard M. Persinger, III Daniel T. Donovan, Esq.
Persinger & Persinger, L.C. Kirkland & Ellis LLP
Charleston, West Virginia Washington, D.C.
Counsel for Petitioners Counsel for Respondent
CHIEF JUSTICE WOOTON delivered the Opinion of the Court.
JUSTICE ARMSTEAD, deeming himself disqualified, did not participate in the decision
of this case.
JUDGE HARDY, sitting by designation.
JUSTICE WALKER dissents and reserves the right to file a separate opinion.
JUSTICE BUNN dissents and reserves the right to file a separate opinion.
SYLLABUS BY THE COURT
1. “‘“A de novo standard is applied by this court in addressing the legal
issues presented by a [sic] certified questions from a federal district or appellate court.”
Syl. Pt. 1, Light v. Allstate Ins. Co., 203 W.Va. 27, 506 S.E.2d 64 (1998).’ Syllabus Point
2, Aikens v. Debow, 208 W.Va. 486, 541 S.E.2d 576 (2000).” Syl. Pt. 1, Harper v. Jackson
Hewitt, Inc., 227 W. Va. 142, 706 S.E.2d 63 (2010).
2. “If an oil and gas lease provides for a royalty based on proceeds
received by the lessee, unless the lease provides otherwise, the lessee must bear all costs
incurred in exploring for, producing, marketing, and transporting the product to the point
of sale.” Syl. Pt. 4, Wellman v. Energy Res., Inc., 210 W. Va. 200, 557 S.E.2d 254 (2001).
3. Except as may be specifically provided by the parties’ agreement,
where an oil and gas lease contains an express or implied duty to market, the requirements
of Wellman v. Energy Resources, Inc., 210 W. Va. 200, 557 S.E.2d 254 (2001), and Estate
of Tawney v. Columbia Natural Resources, L.L.C., 219 W. Va. 266, 633 S.E.2d 22 (2006),
extend to the point of sale, not just to the point of marketability or to the first available
market.
4. Except as may be specifically provided by the parties’ agreement, royalties
are payable to the mineral owner/lessor not only from the producer/lessee’s sale of wet gas
i
and residue gas but also from the lessee’s sale of any byproducts of the wet gas such as
natural gas liquids.
5. “‘The general rule as to oil and gas leases is that such contracts will
generally be liberally construed in favor of the lessor, and strictly as against the lessee.’
Syllabus Point 1, Martin v. Consolidated Coal & Oil Corp., 101 W.Va. 721, 133 S.E. 626
(1926).” Syl. Pt. 7, Est. of Tawney, 219 W. Va. 266, 633 S.E.2d 22 (2006).
6. “‘The question as to whether a contract is ambiguous is a questio