Legal Opinion
J. M. Young v. Ethyl Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided July 25, 1975No. 74-1775PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HEANEY, Circuit Judge.
In this diversity action, plaintiff-appellant Young seeks an injunction and damages or an accounting for the defendants’ actions in forcibly removing valuable minerals from beneath his land by means of injection and production wells on surrounding property. The District Court dismissed his complaint after a trial on the merits. Young v. Ethyl Corp., 382 F.Supp. 769 (W.D.Ark.1974).
The defendants hold mineral leases on approximately 16,000 acres of land overlying the “Smackover Limestone Formation” in Columbia County, Arkansas. Their salt-water recycling operation brings…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Elliff v. Texon Drilling. Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1948
- Yoder v. Nu-Enamel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1941
- Railroad Commission of Texas v. ManzielTexas Supreme Court · 1962
- Brown v. SpilmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- Osborn v. Arkansas Territorial Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- J. M. Young, Cross-Appellant v. Ethyl Corporation, Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1978
- Jameson v. Ethyl Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
- Briggs v. Sw. Energy Prod. Co.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Deltic Timber Corp. v. Great Lakes Chemical Corp.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1998
- Briggs v. Southwestern Energy, Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2020
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.