Osage Gas Co. v. Cleveland & Morgantown Coal Co.
West Virginia Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
Woods, Judge:
This is an action in assumpsit on the common counts, in which the plaintiff seeks to recover, as evidenced by its bill of particulars, $3,688.00, for casing, drilling, super intendency of drilling and tubing a certain water well. The case was tried by a jury, and a verdict for $3,182.92 was returned. From a judgment entered thereon, the defendant prosecutes this writ of error.
The following facts are disclosed by the evidence: The Purseglove Coal Mining Company and the defendant Cleveland & Morgantown Coal Company, both corporations, were engaged in mining coal on contiguous coal…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Starcher v. South Penn Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1918
- Kimmins v. OldhamWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1885
- Loverin & Browne Co. v. BumgarnerWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1906
- Goodwin v. Tony Pocahontas Coal Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1921
- Smith v. BlackWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1925
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- De Stubner v. United Carbon Co.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1946
- Pollock v. Ohio-Apex, Inc.District Court, S.D. West Virginia · 1955
- Bates v. Board of EducationWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1949