Cities Service Oil Co. v. Geolograph Co., Inc.

Plaintiff in error was plaintiff in the trial court and defendant in error was defendant. They will be referred to as they appeared in the court below.

Plaintiff sought recovery from defendant on a written contract, claiming there was due and owing by reason of same, a substantial sum as “overriding royalty” payments based on annual “gross rentals” received by defendant for the year ending June 30, 1949, on a certain patented device, known by its registered trade-mark as a “Geolo-graph”, and used for recording drilling operations.

Defendant joined issue by answer admitting the execution of said…