Legal Opinion

Tibbens v. Clayton

District Court, E.D. Oklahoma

Decided March 8, 1923No. 2809PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WILLIAMS, District Judge.

The question decisive of the above styled and numbered cause involves the power of the county court to ap*394prove an oil and gas or such mining lease, or the extension of renewal thereof made by guardian of a minor through private negotiation and without competitive bidding or preliminary .public notice, and'without first having been so authorized by the said court, prior to the promulgation of probate rule No. 9, made effective by the Supreme Court of the state of Oklahoma on July 10, 1914. ,

In Duff et al. v. Keaton et al., 33 Okl. 92, 124 Pac. 291, 42 L. R. A. (N. S.)…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Duff v. KeatonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Beers v. HaughtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1835
  3. McKeen v. Delancy's LesseeSupreme Court of the United States · 1809
  4. Maharry v. EatmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  5. Winona Oil Co. v. BarnesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Jones v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
  2. Clayton v. TibbensCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1924
  3. Self v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1928
  4. Wiley v. Gypsy Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  5. People ex rel. Vogel v. FairmanAppellate Court of Illinois · 1983

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