This suit involves the interpretation of a mineral lease and asks (1) whether the lease's offset production clause created a general duty to protect against all drainage, even when the allegedly draining well did not trigger the duty; (2) whether the court of appeals relied on an argument barred by res judicata; (3) whether there was a fact dispute about the existence of drainage; and (4) whether the court of appeals erred by reversing a summary judgment on unchallenged claims.