Legal Opinion

Julian v. Schwartz

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 28, 1936No. Civ. 9796PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARD, J., pro tem.

This proceeding involves conflicting claims to certain oil wells in the Santa Fc Oil Field in the county of Los Angeles. By stipulation, or without objection, certain documents were introduced in evidence. Therefrom the history pertaining to the premises essential to the consideration of the issues raised by the pleadings may be stated as follows: On November 10, 1921, Lem A. Brunson and wife leased to the Globe Petroleum Company all of the north half of the north half of the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter of section six (6), township three (3) south, range…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Dabney v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Domestic & Foreign Petroleum Co. v. LongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Dabney-Johnston Oil Corp. v. WaldenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Western Oil & Refining Co. v. Venago Oil Corp.California Supreme Court · 1933
  5. Boehm v. SpreckelsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Malloy v. FongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Austin v. Hallmark Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Gavina v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  4. United States v. RedfieldDistrict Court, D. Nevada · 1961
  5. Kadota Fig Ass'n of Producers v. Case-Swayne Co.California Court of Appeal · 1946

7 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