Legal Opinion
Montana Consolidated Mines Corp. v. O'Connell
Montana Supreme Court
Decided November 17, 1938No. 7,782PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Morris
November 10, 1931, Montana Mines Corporation, predecessor of the plaintiff, entered into a lease contract with Samuel J. 0 ’Connell, by which plaintiff leased to 0 ’Connell certain mining property situated in Broadwater county “for the period of two years from and after the execution of this contract with the privilege in the party of the second part [O’Connell] to extend this contract from year to year provided the party of the second part works said mine continuously from and after the date of this agreement and subject to the terms thereof.”
One of the provisions of the contract is: “This…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Stephens County v. Mid-Kansas Oil & Gas Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1923
- Powell v. NicholsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Rockhill Tennis Club of Kansas City v. VolkerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- Gazlay v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Banks v. HaskieCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1876
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Florence Lustig Crossman, A/K/A Florence Lustig, Trading and Doing Business as Florence Lustig v. Fontainebleau Hotel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Nantt v. Puckett Energy Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
- Lewis v. State, Department of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 1984
- Florence Lustig Crossman, A/K/A Florence Lustig, Trading and Doing Business as Florence Lustig v. Fontainebleau Hotel Corp.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Lewis v. Department of RevenueMontana Supreme Court · 1984