Legal Opinion

Mimi Corp. v. Hill

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided November 13, 1962No. 6845PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PICKETT, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiff-appellants brought this action seeking a declaratory judgment to the effect that overriding royalties owned by the defendant-appellees were not payable out of production from an oil and gas lease issued to the plaintiffs under the preference provisions of the Act of July 29,1942, ch. 534, 56 Stat. 726.1 The plaintiffs, as owners of the lease, assert that the defendants’ royalty interests were lost when the original lease expired, even though a preference lease was issued to them under the provisions of this Act. The plaintiffs also assert that all royalty…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. La Laguna Ranch Co. v. DodgeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
  2. Oldland v. GrayCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1950
  3. Dougherty v. California Kettleman Oil Royalties, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Blackner v. McDermottCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
  5. Clarence Keese, Appants v. Continental Pipe Line CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Degenhart v. Gold King Petroleum Corp.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. Mimi Corporation v. HillCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1962

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API