Legal Opinion
Scheel v. Harr
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 28, 1938No. Civ. 2227PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HAINES, J., pro tem.
Respondents Scheel, in consideration of $10 and certain royalties reserved, entered on July 8, 1936, into an oil lease with one P. W. Harr and Edward C. White, affecting lands belonging to respondents in Kern County, and by its terms running for twenty years from its date “and so long thereafter as oil or gas or casinghead gas or other hydrocarbon substances, or either or any of them, is produced therefrom in quantities deemed paying by lessee”. The lease was assigned by Harr and White to the Diane Company, a copartnership, and by it to appellant, Stanford Petroleum…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Callahan v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Dabney v. EdwardsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Dabney-Johnston Oil Corp. v. WaldenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
- Utt v. FreyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
- Sheehan v. VedderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Taliaferro v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- Kennecott Corp. v. Union Oil Co.California Court of Appeal · 1987
- Tide Water Associated Oil Co. v. CurtinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Wilcox v. WestCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Payne v. CallahanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.