RAMA Operating Company, Inc. v. Barker, 286 P.3d 1138 (Kan. Ct. App. Jul, 27, 2012)

(defendant obtained an oil and gas lease from property owners; defendant had a title opinion done for a previous lease on the tract that showed a recorded release of the rights; defendant required a second release recorded; defendant assigned his rights to plaintiff; plaintiff appeared on the tract to commence drilling and was told by landowner there may be an adverse drilling lease; plaintiff was told by the prior lessee that the release was a mistake, so plaintiff abandoned its drilling and filed suit against defendant claiming a breach of warranty of title; defendant filed summary judgment which was denied; after a trial, the court ordered damages against defendant for expenses in commencement of drilling; defendant appealed the denial of his summary judgment; appellate court held that summary judgment should have been granted as plaintiff failed to respond with more than general denials of undisputed facts; specifically court held that state law requires actual lawful claims be brought against deed holder before any claim for breach of warranty applies; in this case, plaintiff merely stopped drilling and vacated without actual claim of superior right, plaintiff failed to present any specific facts to controvert recorded releases of prior lease or production history showing lack of continued production resulting in termination of lease regardless of release, so appellate court held trial court erred in failing to grant summary judgment and reverse and remanded).