Legal Opinion
Humble Oil & Refining Co. v. Goldsmith
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided July 31, 1946No. 9572PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McCLENDON, Chief Justice.
Rule 37 case. The appeal is from a final judgment refusing to cancel a permit to drill a well upon a .0996 acre tract 7½ varas wide (north-south) by 208 feet long (east-west)- in the Hawkins townsite in the Hawkins field in Wood County, as an exception to Rule 37, in order to prevent confiscation of property. The suit was brought by Humble (Humble Oil & Refining Company, lessee of an adjoining tract to the south) against the Commission (Railroad Commission of Texas, its members and secretary) and Goldsmith (the permit-tee as owner of an oil and gas lease acquired from…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Rio Bravo Oil Co. v. WeedTexas Supreme Court · 1932
- Cantley v. Gulf Production Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1940
- Worthington v. WadeTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Coxl v. CampbellTexas Supreme Court · 1940
- Texas Bitulithic Co. v. WarwickTexas Commission of Appeals · 1927
3Cited by3 opinions
- Manziel v. Railroad CommissionCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1946
- Goldsmith v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1947
- Sipirano v. BowlbyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957