Legal Opinion
Williams v. Humble Oil & Refining Company
District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Decided August 28, 1968No. Civ. A. 14312PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RUBIN, District Judge:
FINDINGS ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
For reasons set forth in the attached memorandum opinion, the motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. However, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 56(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court has examined the pleadings and the evidence before it and has interrogated counsel to ascertain what material facts exist without substantial controversy and what material facts are actually and in good faith controverted. The following facts appear to be without material controversy, and upon trial…
2Cases cited65 opinions
- Erie Railroad v. TompkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Frost-Johnson Lumber Co. v. Salling's HeirsSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
- Hartman Ranch Co. v. Associated Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1937
- Melancon v. Texas CompanySupreme Court of Louisiana · 1956
- Roberson v. Pioneer Gas Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1931
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Frey v. Amoco Production Co.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1992
- Williams v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
- Laurest J. Trahan, Cross-Appellees v. Superior Oil Company, Cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1983
- Rathborne Land Co., LLC v. Ascent Energy, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2010
- Floyd Williams v. Humble Oil & Refining CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1970
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.