Legal Opinion

McCormick v. Union Pacific Railroad

Colorado Court of Appeals

Decided December 10, 1998No. 97CA1625PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge TAUBMAN.

In this quiet title action, the disposi-tive issue is whether, in the deed reservations here, the term “minerals” includes oil and gas. We hold that it does and thus affirm the summary judgment entered against plaintiffs, G. Todd McCormick; Maura C. McCormick; Paul Hoshiko; Jean Hoshiko; Sylva Kunzman; Glen P. Rouse; Peg M. Wykes; and Ritchey Land & Cattle Company, Ine.(Ritchey), and in favor of defendants, Union Pacific Railroad Company; Union Pacific Resources Company (“UPR”); Snyder Oil Corp; Amoco Production Company; Elk Exploration, Inc.; L. Alice Collister;…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Radke v. Union Pacific Railroad CompanySupreme Court of Colorado · 1959
  2. Farrell v. SayreSupreme Court of Colorado · 1954
  3. Simson v. LangholfSupreme Court of Colorado · 1956
  4. Barker v. MintzSupreme Court of Colorado · 1923
  5. Bulger v. McCourtNebraska Supreme Court · 1965

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. McCormick v. Union Pacific Resources Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2000
  2. Graham v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Colorado · 2022
  3. McCormick v. Union Pacific Resources Co.Supreme Court of Colorado · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API