Legal Opinion

Sheffield v. Hogg

Texas Supreme Court

Decided February 27, 1935No. Motion Nos. 11692, 11693; Nos. 6001, 6130PublishedCited by 75 opinions

1Per curiam

The motions for rehearing and the several arguments filed in connection therewith have been carefully examined and considered and are overruled.

It has been suggested in a motion filed in connection with the motions for rehearing that the opinion be clarified by pointing out more particularly the nature of the royalty interest in section 32 involved in the “Federal Royalty Company Case,” and which section is, for convenience, referred to in the opinion as an unpatented school land survey.

That section, after being classified as mineral, was sold by the state with reservation to the state of all…

2Cited by75 opinions

  1. Veal v. ThomasonTexas Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Childress County v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1936
  3. Murphy v. DilworthTexas Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Tennant v. DunnTexas Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Wintermann v. McDonaldTexas Supreme Court · 1937

70 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API