D & N Farms, LLC et al v. Crawley Petroleum Corporation

Filing 77

ORDER by District Judge Ronald A. White affirming and adopting 50 Report and Recommendation and denying Defendant's 33 Motion for Partial Judgment on the Pleadings (tls, Deputy Clerk)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA
D & N Farms, LLC,
D & R Minerals, LLC,
James Harold Miller and Zeida Frances Miller, and
HZM Land and Minerals, LLC, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. CIV-23-234-RAW-DES

Crawley Petroleum Corporation,
Defendant.
ORDER
Before the court are the motion for partial judgment on the pleadings filed by Defendant
Crawley Petroleum Corporation [Docket No. 33], and the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”)
by United States Magistrate Judge Snow recommending that the motion be denied [Docket No.
50]. Defendant argues that (1) Plaintiffs’ claim for permanent injunctive relief fails because
Plaintiffs have not alleged and cannot allege that they will suffer irreparable harm because any
alleged harm is compensable with monetary damages; and (2) Plaintiffs’ claim for declaratory
relief fails because it is subsumed within the breach of contract claim.
The R&R concludes that Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint provides sufficient factual
allegations, that taken as true, could support a claim that Defendant’s failure to perform an
enhancement analysis makes it difficult to calculate damages with a reasonable degree of
certainty. The R&R further concludes that Plaintiffs’ claim for declaratory relief as alleged in
the First Amended Complaint is distinct from their breach of contract claim and seeks a legal

determination of the Defendant’s obligation to perform an enhancement analysis under
Oklahoma law, rather than damages for past actions.
The Defendant argues that the R&R is erroneous on the first conclusion and “just flat
wrong” on the second. The court disagrees. As stated in the R&R and in Plaintiffs’ amended
opposition to the Defendant’s objection to the R&R, when the allegations are viewed in the light
most favorable to Plaintiffs with reasonable inferences drawn in their favor, the First Amended
Complaint plausibly alleges claims for permanent injunctive relief and declaratory relief.
After a de novo review, this court finds that the R&R is well-supported. The R&R
[Docket No. 50] is hereby affirmed and adopted as this court’s Findings and Order. The motion
for partial judgment on the pleadings [Docket No. 33] is denied.
IT IS SO ORDERED this 10th day of March, 2025.
______________________________________
THE HONORABLE RONALD A. WHITE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA

2