Jividen v. New Pittsburg Coal Co.
Ohio Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
By BLOSSER, PJ.
The rights of the parties involve a construction of the language used in the deed of the Thomases to Jasper P. Jividen, and the meaning of the same must be gathered from the words used, in the light of the facts and surrounding circumstances of the parties at the time of the execution and delivery of the deed. The plaintiff contends that at that time there was no oil or gas development on the property, and none in the immediate vicinity; that there was at that time a coal mine in operation on the premises; that with the exception of agriculture the principal industry in…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Barker v. Campbell-Ratcliff Land Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Hudson & Collins v. McGuireCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1920
3Cited by10 opinions
- Heinatz v. AllenTexas Supreme Court · 1949
- Faith United Methodist Church & Cemetery of Terra Alta v. MorganWest Virginia Supreme Court · 2013
- Yuscavage v. HamlinSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Shell Oil Co. v. Manley Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1941
- Sheba v. KautzOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.