Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Weiner v. Wilshire Oil Co.

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided March 7, 1964No. 43,344Published

1ConcurrenceSchroeder, J.

I concur with the result reached by the court, but disagree as to the reasons. In my opinion, the written instruments in question are ambiguous and require a resort to extrinsic evidence. Only then can a court consider the fact that the appellees knew they were dealing with Dougherty as an agent, and that the parties recognized the overriding royalty interest of the appellees in subsequent assignments.

*499Another rule of construction (in addition to the rules stated in the court’s opinion) applicable to a written contract is that where an irreconcilable conflict exists between general provisions…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Wolf v. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident AssociationSupreme Court of Kansas · 1961
  2. Pittsburg Vitrified Paving & Building Brick Co. v. BaileySupreme Court of Kansas · 1907
  3. Geier v. Eagle-Cherokee Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1957
  4. Oliver v. NugenSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
  5. Berg v. ScullySupreme Court of Kansas · 1926

9 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