Legal Opinion · Dissent

Duquesne Natural Gas Co. v. Fefolt

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided March 19, 1964No. Appeal, 173Published

1Dissent

Dissenting Opinion by

Montgomery, J.:

I respectfully disagree with the majority in its conclusion that Prager’s Estate, 74 Pa. Superior Ct. 592 (1920), does not control the present case. The instrument now before us is very similar to if not identical with the one in that case. It conveys to the Byers Oil and Gas Company, a trust, and to its successors and assigns “all the oil and gas in and under” the tract of land described therein, with the right to use water and the surface land for the purpose of producing and transporting oil, gas and water; “reserving however, to first party the equal…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Smith v. Glen Alden Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943
  2. Barnsdall v. Bradford Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1909
  3. Erie City v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1924
  4. Herr v. City of LebanonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1892
  5. Hamilton v. FosterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1922

9 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