Legal Opinion · Dissent

Tenneco Oil Co. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 10, 1984No. 53201Published

1DissentOpala, Justice

The opinion holds that the district court may settle disputed claims to participation rights conferred by, and acquirable through compliance with, the terms of a forced-pooling order of the Corporation Commission [Commission or Agency]. Because I deem these controversies to lie within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commission, I recede from today’s pronouncement.

I

THE DISPUTE

The dispute arises from a pooling order conferring on Tenneco [appellee] provisional operator status conditioned on commencement of operations within ninety days. If Tenneco failed to do so within this period, El Paso…

2Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Stone v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Amarex, Inc. v. BakerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1983
  3. Woods Petroleum Corp. v. SledgeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981
  4. National Bank of Tulsa Bldg. v. GoldsmithSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1951
  5. Gulfstream Petroleum Corp. v. LaydenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1981

22 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