Legal Opinion

C. B. & T. Co. v. Hefner

New Mexico Court of Appeals

Decided August 19, 1982No. 5537PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

WOOD, Judge.

Plaintiff contracted to sell and defendants contracted to buy certain real and personal property. The contract did not expressly refer to a working interest in a producing gas well. On the basis that the working interest was conveyed, because not expressly reserved, defendants demanded that plaintiff turn over runs from the well. See Sachs v. Board of Trustees, etc., 89 N.M. 712, 557 P.2d 209 (1976). Plaintiff refused and sued seeking rescission of the contract or alternative relief. Defendants’ counterclaim included a claim for conversion; thus, this court’s jurisdiction.…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Duke City Lumber Company, Inc. v. TerrelNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Sierra Blanca Sales Co., Inc. v. Newco Industries, Inc.New Mexico Court of Appeals · 1972
  3. Klemm v. Superior CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Thompson v. H. B. Zachry Co.New Mexico Supreme Court · 1966
  5. Taylor v. McBeeNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1967

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. LK Operating, LLC v. Collection Group, LLCWashington Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Lane v. OustaletMississippi Supreme Court · 2004
  3. Cano v. LovatoNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1986
  4. Thomas Ex Rel. Schmidt v. ThomasNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  5. Otero v. ZouharNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1984

6 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