Legal Opinion

George v. Manhattan Land & Fruit Co.

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

Decided June 29, 1931No. 6079PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HUTCHESON, Circuit Judge.

This appeal presents the question whether the trial court erred in finding as it did,' that appellee, Manhattan Land & Fruit Company, plaintiff below, was the owner of the mineral rights involved in this suit, and as such entitled to its decree against George and Nigh, appellants here, defendants in the court below.

Much testimony, both documentary and oral, was offered. The District Judge found that appellee had conveyed to George its land alone, reserving the mineral rights, and that Nigh was in no better position than George to claim the minerals, because the…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. McDuffie v. WalkerSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1909
  2. Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Salling's HeirsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
  3. John T. Moore Planting Co. v. Morgan's Louisiana & T. R. & S. S. Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1908
  4. Hanby v. Texas Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1916
  5. Arent v. HunterSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1930

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Horace Case v. Arthur E. MorrisetteCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
  2. Daigle v. Calcasieu Nat. Bank in Lake CharlesSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1942
  3. Porter v. CookeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1942
  4. West v. WitschnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1968
  5. Blevins v. Sun Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1940

5 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