Legal Opinion

Hillegust v. Amerada Petroleum Corporation

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided September 22, 1955No. 5052PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ANDERSON, Justice.

The appellants were plaintiffs in the trial court and will be so referred to here. In their petition they represent that they sue “in trespass to try title for the removal of a cloud upon their mineral title, for the construction of mineral deeds and royalty conveyances and declaratory judgment relief.” The petition contains a formal count in trespass to try title which, standing alqne, would place in issue title to, as well as the right to possession of, • 75 acres of land in Montgomery County,. Texas, a part of the Joseph House League. However, in addition to pleading the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hanks v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Texas Commission of Appeals · 1930
  2. Texas Co. v. CurryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1921
  3. Dacamara v. BinneyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1940
  4. Easley v. Brookline Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1952
  5. Hanks v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1928

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Ridge Oil Co., Inc. v. Guinn Investments, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 2004
  2. Gerhard v. StephensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  3. Cain v. NeumannCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1958
  4. Clovis v. Pacific Northwest Pipeline CorporationSupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
  5. Temple-Inland Forest Products Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1993

7 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