CJ-2026-00035 - XTO Energy Inc. v. Unbridled Resources LLC

What's This Case About?

Let’s get one thing straight: in the wild, lawless world of Oklahoma oil fields, you don’t just forget to pay someone $590,000. You either made a mistake so boneheaded it defies belief, or you’re playing a very risky game of financial keep-away. And according to XTO Energy Inc.—a subsidiary of ExxonMobil, one of the largest oil companies on the planet—Unbridled Resources LLC and Diversified Production LLC didn’t just forget. They allegedly decided to sit on over half a million dollars in oil proceeds that belonged to someone else, for years, like it was their personal piggy bank. And now, the courtroom lights are on, the jury demand is filed, and the stakes are higher than a derrick at high noon.

So who are these people? On one side, we’ve got XTO Energy Inc., the corporate Goliath with deep pockets, deeper records, and a very sharp legal team from Crowe & Dunlevy. They’re not some fly-by-night driller; they’re the kind of company that owns working interests, royalty interests, and overriding royalty interests (yes, that’s a real thing, and yes, it means money) across multiple counties in western Oklahoma. Think of them as landlords of the underground—they don’t always run the rigs, but they get paid every time oil comes out. On the other side, we’ve got Unbridled Resources and Diversified Production, two shell-like entities operating out of Birmingham, Alabama, but doing business in Oklahoma’s oil patch. They’re the ones who, at least according to the filing, were supposed to cut XTO a check every month from the revenue stream. Instead, they allegedly hit the “suspend” button—and left it there. For years.

Now, let’s talk about how oil money is supposed to work, because apparently someone missed the memo. In Oklahoma, the Production Revenue Standards Act is basically the Ten Commandments for oil operators. One of its core rules? If you’re holding someone else’s oil money, you don’t get to treat it like Monopoly cash. The law says that money is separate, sacrosanct—like church tithes or your grandma’s cookie jar. You hold it, you account for it, and you pay it out on time. Specifically, the law requires operators to pay owners like XTO no later than the end of the second month after the oil is sold. Gas royalties? Third month. That’s not a suggestion—it’s the law. And when you ignore it, you’re not just being rude. You’re violating a statute designed to protect everyone from exactly this kind of financial hijacking.

But here’s what Unbridled allegedly did: they took XTO’s share of oil proceeds from at least 17 different wells scattered across Beckham, Washita, Ellis, and Roger Mills Counties—wells with names like Staley I-29, Tango, and Walter Trust—and dumped all that money into “suspense.” That’s oil industry jargon for “we’re not paying you, but we’re still holding it.” And while suspense accounts are sometimes used when there’s a legal question about ownership—like if someone dies and the heirs are fighting over who gets the checks—XTO insists there was no lawful reason for the holdup. No dispute. No paperwork issue. Just… radio silence. And interest piling up at 12% per year, compounded annually, because Oklahoma law really doesn’t like being ignored.

And the numbers? Oh, the numbers. The Staley well in Beckham County alone has over $244,000 in suspended funds—nearly half the total. The Gray well in Washita County? $126,000. Rollie, Kenny, Tango—each one a little pocket of frozen cashflow. By September 2024, the total owed had blown past $590,000. And because oil keeps flowing, the amount kept growing—until XTO finally said, “Enough.” They sent demands. They got nothing. No explanation. No apology. Just silence and spreadsheets full of unpaid revenue.

Then, in a move that feels less like corporate transition and more like passing the hot potato, Unbridled’s affiliate—Diversified Production LLC—took over operations on some of the same wells, including the Walter Trust and Cross Timbers properties. And guess what? The suspension continued. Like a bad sequel, the same plot, different name on the lease. XTO now claims Diversified inherited not just the operator role, but also the obligation to pay—and the liability for not doing so.

So why are they in court? Three big reasons, wrapped in legal packaging but easy to unwrap. First: Violation of the Oklahoma Production Revenue Standards Act. That’s the big one—the state’s own rulebook for oil payments. XTO says Unbridled and Diversified broke the law by withholding funds without excuse, and they want every penny back, plus that juicy 12% interest that’s been compounding like a financial time bomb. Second: Conversion. That’s legalese for “you stole my property.” In this case, the “property” is money—specifically, cash that became XTO’s the moment the oil was sold. By refusing to hand it over, XTO claims the defendants acted like they owned it, which they didn’t. And because the filing calls the conduct “willful, wanton, and in reckless disregard,” they’re also asking for punitive damages—meaning, “punish them so they don’t do it again.” Third: Money Had and Received. Sounds old-timey, but it’s simple equity: if you’ve got money that belongs to someone else, and it’s unfair for you to keep it, you have to give it back. It’s the legal version of “Hey, that’s not yours.”

Now, what does XTO actually want? Well, first, the $590,000 (and counting). Is that a lot? In most households, yes—life-changing, house-on-the-beach kind of money. But in the oil business? It’s a rounding error on a quarterly report. For XTO, a company that moves millions of dollars daily, this isn’t about survival—it’s about principle, precedent, and punishment. They’re also demanding attorney fees, expert fees, pre- and post-judgment interest, and a full accounting—basically, a court order forcing the defendants to open their books and show exactly how much was made, how much was owed, and why it wasn’t paid. And yes, they want a jury. Which means this isn’t just a paperwork dispute—it’s drama waiting to happen in a Beckham County courtroom, with oilmen, lawyers, and possibly a few confused farmers in the gallery.

Our take? The most absurd part isn’t even the amount—it’s the sheer audacity of letting $590,000 sit in suspense for years without so much as a “sorry, we’re working on it.” This isn’t a missing invoice. This is a multi-year financial freeze on a dozen wells, across multiple counties, with no justification. And the fact that one company (Unbridled) allegedly stopped paying, then passed the operator baton to its affiliate (Diversified), who kept not paying? That reeks of a pattern, not a mistake. It’s like watching someone “lose” your rent check for three years, then hand the apartment building to their cousin, who also “can’t find it.”

Are we rooting for XTO? Sure—but not because they’re the little guy. We’re rooting because the system only works if people have to pay. If operators can just decide not to send checks and nothing happens, then Oklahoma’s oil patch turns into the Wild West all over again. And while we love a good cowboy story, we don’t love one where the bank gets to keep the deposit. This case isn’t about greed. It’s about rules. And right now, someone’s pretending they don’t apply.

So grab your boots, your briefs, and your bailiff—this one’s going to trial by jury. And when the judge finally bangs the gavel, one thing’s for sure: someone’s going to owe a lot more than $590,000 when the interest kicks in.

Case Overview

$590,000 Demand Jury Trial Petition

Jurisdiction

District Court, Oklahoma

Filing Attorney

Evan G. Vincent

Crowe & Dunlevy, P.C.

Relief Sought

$590,000 Monetary

Plaintiffs

XTO Energy Inc. business
Rep: Evan G. Vincent, OBA #22325

Defendants

Unbridled Resources LLC business
Rep: C T Corporation System
Diversified Production LLC business
Rep: C T Corporation System

Claims

#	Cause of Action	Description
1	Violation of the Oklahoma Production Revenue Standards Act
2	Conversion
3	Money Had and Received

Petition Text

2,488 words

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BECKHAM COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA XTO ENERGY INC., Plaintiff, v. UNBRIDLED RESOURCES LLC and DIVERSIFIED PRODUCTION LLC, Defendants. PETITION Plaintiff XTO Energy Inc. ("XTO"), states as follows for its causes of action against Defendants Unbridled Resources LLC ("Unbridled") and Diversified Production LLC ("Diversified Production") (collectively, "Defendants"): INTRODUCTION 1. XTO owns working interests, royalty interests, and overriding royalty interests in numerous oil and gas wells across Beckham, Ellis, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma. Defendants are or were the operators of and/or persons holding revenue or proceeds from those wells, and were responsible for distributing XTO’s share of production proceeds. 2. Instead of paying XTO, Defendants placed all of XTO’s proceeds in suspense, with no lawful justification. Defendants have continued to withhold XTO’s production proceeds for several years. 3. As of approximately September 2024, the total amount of proceeds improperly withheld from XTO from the properties at issue exceeded $590,000. The total has continued to grow with each month of continued production, and Defendants continue to withhold XTO’s proceeds as of the date of this Petition. 4. XTO is entitled to recover all withheld proceeds, statutory interest under the Oklahoma Production Revenue Standards Act, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. PARTIES 5. Plaintiff XTO Energy Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Spring, Texas. 6. Defendant Unbridled Resources LLC is a Delaware limited liability company authorized to transact business in the State of Oklahoma, with its principal office at 1600 Corporate Drive, Birmingham, Alabama 35242. Unbridled may be served with process through its registered agent, C T Corporation System, 1833 South Morgan Road, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73128. 7. Defendant Diversified Production LLC is a Pennsylvania limited liability company authorized to transact business in the State of Oklahoma, with its principal office at 1600 Corporate Drive, Birmingham, Alabama 35242. Diversified may be served with process through its registered agent, C T Corporation System, 1833 South Morgan Road, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73128. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 8. This Court has original jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Article VII, Section 7 of the Oklahoma Constitution, which vests the district courts with unlimited original jurisdiction of all justiciable matters. Defendants transact business in the State of Oklahoma, and the claims asserted herein arise from that conduct. 9. Venue is proper in Beckham County pursuant to 12 O.S. § 139 because a substantial portion of the causes of action asserted herein arose in Beckham County, where a substantial portion of the Subject Properties are located and where Defendants failed to pay XTO proceeds from the production of oil and gas. FACTUAL BACKGROUND XTO’s Interests and Defendants’ Obligation to Pay 10. XTO owns working interests, royalty interests, and overriding royalty interests in oil and gas wells located in Beckham, Ellis, Roger Mills, and Washita Counties, Oklahoma, including those identified on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated by reference (the “Subject Properties”). 11. Unbridled served as operator of and/or person holding revenue or proceeds from the Subject Properties during periods relevant to this dispute and was obligated to timely pay XTO its proportionate share of the proceeds of production from the Subject Properties. 52 O.S. § 570.10(B). 12. Under Oklahoma law, any person holding revenue or proceeds from the sale of oil and gas production is required to hold such revenue or proceeds for the benefit of the owners legally entitled thereto. Such revenue or proceeds are regarded as separate and distinct from all other funds of any person receiving or holding the same. 52 O.S. § 570.10(A). Diversified’s Succession to Operator Obligations of Certain Subject Properties 13. In approximately January of 2025, Unbridled’s affiliate, Diversified, succeeded Unbridled as the operator of certain of the Subject Properties. On information and belief, Diversified is now the operator of the Walter Trust and Cross Timbers properties, and may have succeeded to operatorship of additional Subject Properties. 14. To the extent Diversified has succeeded to operatorship of any Subject Property, Diversified has also continued to withhold XTO’s production proceeds on those properties without lawful justification, and is a person holding revenue or proceeds from the sale of oil and gas production for the benefit of XTO within the meaning of 52 O.S. § 570.10(A). Defendants’ Wrongful Suspension of XTO’s Proceeds 15. For years, Defendants have failed to pay XTO any of the proceeds to which XTO is entitled from the Subject Properties. On information and belief, Unbridled placed all of XTO’s production proceeds from the Subject Properties into suspense status, and Diversified has continued that suspension on properties where it has succeeded to operatorship. 16. Defendants had no lawful justification for suspending XTO’s proceeds. 17. As of approximately September 2024, the total amount of production proceeds improperly withheld from XTO exceeded approximately $590,000 with respect to the Subject Properties. The total amount withheld has continued to grow with each month of continued production through the current date and continuing, and the current total substantially exceeds that amount. The only exception is the Tango property, which stopped accumulating additional principal sums due to XTO in May of 2025 when XTO divested its interest in that property. 18. XTO has demanded that Defendants pay the amounts owed. Defendants have failed and refused to do so without lawful justification. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT 1: VIOLATION OF THE OKLAHOMA PRODUCTION REVENUE STANDARDS ACT (52 O.S. §§ 570.1-570.15) 19. XTO incorporates all factual allegations above as if fully set forth herein. 20. XTO is an “owner” legally entitled to proceeds from the sale of oil and gas production from the Subject Properties by virtue of its working interests, royalty interests, and overriding royalty interests, within the meaning of 52 O.S. § 570.2. 21. Defendants are persons who have received or held revenue or proceeds derived from the sale of production from oil or gas wells located in the State of Oklahoma, and who are charged with the duty to pay those proceeds to XTO as an owner legally entitled thereto, within the meaning of 52 O.S. § 570.10. 22. Under 52 O.S. § 570.1, Defendants were required to pay XTO’s share of production proceeds not later than the last day of the second succeeding month after the end of the month within which such production is sold. For gas royalty proceeds remitted to the operator pursuant to 52 O.S. § 570.4(B), Defendants were required to pay not later than the last day of the third succeeding month after the end of the month within which such production is sold. 23. Defendants have failed to pay XTO’s share of production proceeds from the Subject Properties within the time periods required by the Act. Instead, Defendants have placed XTO’s proceeds in suspense without lawful justification. 24. Under 52 O.S. § 570(C)(1), XTO is entitled to recover its actual damages so sustained. 25. Under 52 O.S. § 570.14(C), the prevailing party in any action brought pursuant to the Production Revenue Standards Act is entitled to recover the costs of suit, including reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees. 26. Under 52 O.S. § 570.10(D)(1), XTO is entitled to recover interest on all unpaid proceeds at the rate of twelve percent per annum, compounded annually, calculated from the end of the month in which such production was sold until the day paid. 27. Under 52 O.S. § 570.14(C)(2), XTO is also entitled to specific performance. Defendants have maintained the books and records relating to production, sales, revenues, and distributions for the Subject Properties. XTO does not have independent access to full and complete information regarding the amount of production from, and proceeds attributable to, its interests in each of the Subject Properties. Specific performance in the form of a full accounting is necessary and equitable to determine the amounts owed to XTO. COUNT 2: CONVERSION 28. XTO incorporates all factual allegations above as if fully set forth herein. 29. Upon the sale of oil and gas production from the Subject Properties, the proceeds attributable to XTO’s interests became the personal property of XTO, to which XTO had an immediate right to possession. 30. Defendants received those proceeds and have exercised unauthorized dominion and control over XTO’s property by placing those proceeds in suspense and refusing to distribute them to XTO. Defendants’ exercise of dominion and control over XTO’s property is inconsistent with and in derogation of XTO’s rights. 31. XTO demanded that Defendants return XTO’s proceeds, and Defendants refused. 32. Defendants’ conduct was willful, wanton, and in reckless disregard of XTO’s rights. 33. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conversion of XTO’s property, XTO has been damaged in an amount to be proven at trial. XTO is entitled to recover actual damages, punitive damages, and costs. COUNT 3: MONEY HAD AND RECEIVED 34. XTO incorporates all factual allegations above as if fully set forth herein. 35. In the alternative, Defendants are holding money that in equity and good conscience belongs to XTO. Defendants received production proceeds attributable to XTO’s interests in the Subject Properties, but have failed and refused to pay those proceeds to XTO. Defendants’ retention of XTO’s proceeds constitutes unjust enrichment from which equity and good conscience require restitution. 36. XTO seeks to recover all production proceeds held by Defendants that rightfully belong to XTO. REQUEST FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, XTO Energy IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF BECKHAM COUNTY Inc. respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment against Defendants for: a. Actual damages in an amount to be proven at trial, representing all production proceeds improperly withheld from XTO; b. Interest at the rate of twelve percent per annum, compounded annually, on all unpaid proceeds as provided by the Oklahoma Production Revenue Standards Act, 52 O.S. § 570.10(D)(1), calculated from the end of the month in which such production was sold until the day paid; c. Prejudgment interest at the highest rate allowed by law; d. Post-judgment interest at the rate provided by law; e. Punitive damages in connection with XTO’s conversion claim, as permitted by 23 O.S. § 9.1, in an amount to be determined at trial; f. Reasonable attorney fees and expert witness fees as provided to the prevailing party under 52 O.S. § 570.14, and as otherwise provided by law or contract; g. Specific performance under 52 O.S. § 570.14(C)(2), including an order requiring Defendants to render a full and complete accounting of all production from, and proceeds attributable to, XTO’s interests in the Subject Properties, from the date Defendants first suspended XTO’s payments through the date of judgment; h. All costs of suit; and i. Such other and further relief, at law or in equity, as this Court deems just and proper. JURY DEMAND XTO Energy Inc. demands a trial by jury on all issues so triable. Respectfully submitted, [Signature] Evan G. Vincent, OBA #22325 CROWE & DUNLEVY, P.C. Braniff Building 324 North Robinson Avenue, Suite 100 Oklahoma City, OK 73102-8273 (405) 235-7700 (405) 239-6651 (Facsimile) [email protected] Jonathan D. Baughman (pro hac vice forthcoming) Austin W. Brister (pro hac vice forthcoming) William K. Grubb (pro hac vice forthcoming) McGinnis Lochridge LLP 609 Main St., Suite 2800 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 615-8500 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF XTO ENERGY INC. <table> <tr> <th>Property</th> <th>Well Name</th> <th>API Number</th> <th>County</th> <th>Sec</th> <th>Twnshp</th> <th>Rng</th> <th>Interest Type</th> <th>Current Operator</th> <th>Approximate Suspense (through Oct. 2024)</th> </tr> <tr> <td>Staley</td> <td>Staley I-29</td> <td>35-009-21355</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>29</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R24W</td> <td>WI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$244,556</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Gray</td> <td>Gray 19-10-18 2HB</td> <td>35-149-21746</td> <td>Washita</td> <td>30</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R18W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$126,467</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Rollie</td> <td>Rollie 2X11-10-25 IHA</td> <td>35-009-21996</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>14</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R25W</td> <td>WI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$97,317</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Kenny</td> <td>Kenny 24X13-19-26 IHA</td> <td>35-045-23778</td> <td>Ellis</td> <td>24</td> <td>T19N</td> <td>R26W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$52,214</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Tango</td> <td>Tango 29X20-10-18 IHB</td> <td>35-149-21739</td> <td>Washita</td> <td>32</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R18W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$36,119</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Eloise</td> <td>Eloise 1-24</td> <td>35-009-21525</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>24</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R25W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$16,745</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Simmons</td> <td>Simmons 3-32</td> <td>35-009-21045</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>32</td> <td>T12N</td> <td>R22W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$15,489</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Fanning</td> <td>Fanning 1-19</td> <td>35-009-21471</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>19</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R24W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$15,173</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Fossie</td> <td>Fossie 4-18</td> <td>35-129-22-887</td> <td>Roger Mills</td> <td>18</td> <td>T15N</td> <td>R22W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$11,175</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Gilliland</td> <td>Gilliland 2-23</td> <td>35-009-21546</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>23</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R25W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$9,797</td> </tr> <tr> <td>D L Sanders</td> <td>D L Sanders 1-24</td> <td>35-009-20179</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>24</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R25W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$9,013</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Barnes</td> <td>Barnes 1-18H</td> <td>35-045-22972</td> <td>Ellis</td> <td>18</td> <td>T21N</td> <td>R24W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$4,893</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Dover</td> <td>Dover 9-16-26 1H</td> <td>35-129-23425</td> <td>Roger Mills</td> <td>9</td> <td>T16N</td> <td>R26W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$3,913</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Zeeck</td> <td>Zeeck 1-19</td> <td>35-009-21278</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>19</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R24W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$3,231</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Walter Trust</td> <td>Walter Trust 1-15</td> <td>35-009-21109</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>15</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R21W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Diversified Production LLC</td> <td>$2,485</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Cross Timbers</td> <td>Cross Timbers 1-15</td> <td>35-009-20838</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>15</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R21W</td> <td>ORRI</td> <td>Diversified Production LLC</td> <td>$2,397</td> </tr> <tr> <td>Flora</td> <td>Flora I-23</td> <td>35-009-21436</td> <td>Beckham</td> <td>23</td> <td>T10N</td> <td>R25W</td> <td>RI</td> <td>Unbridled Resources LLC</td> <td>$1,373</td> </tr> </table>