Legal Opinion

Allen v. Narver

California Supreme Court

Decided April 25, 1918No. L. A. No. 4246. Department TwoPublishedCited by 6 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

VICTOR E. SHAW, J., pro tem.

The question presented on this appeal from a judgment in favor of plaintiff and an order of court denying defendants’ motion for a new trial involves the interpretation of a lease made by plaintiff to defendants of certain lands for use in extracting oil and other mineral substances therefrom, the express consideration therefor being a royalty of one-eighth of the mineral so extracted.

The provision of the lease upon which the action is based is as follows: “It is further expressly agreed and understood, that in the event that the second parties (defendants) shall…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Glasgow v. Chartiers Oil Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  2. Escondido Oil & Development Co. v. GlaserCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Risch v. BurchIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
  4. McComber v. KellermanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Gibson v. OliverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1893

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Barquin v. Hall Oil Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1921
  2. Fidelity Deposit Co. of Maryland v. JonesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
  3. Kelly v. McDonaldCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Wooton v. McAdooCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Hindin v. CaineCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951

1 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