Legal Opinion
Champlin Petroleum Co. v. Shafer
New Mexico Supreme Court
Decided October 28, 1985No. 15847PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WALTERS, Justice.
We accepted certification from the Court of Appeals on the question whether caliche is a mineral reserved to the United States under the Stock-Raising Homestead Act of 1916, 39 Stat. 862 (1916) (SRHA), and particularly under 43 U.S.C. § 299 (1982) of that Act. We determine that caliche is such a mineral.
This controversy arose when plaintiff Champlin Petroleum Company (Champlin) commenced road-building and caliche removal activities pursuant to an easement over the land of defendant Patricia H. Lyman nee Shafer (Shafer). The pleadings would indicate that Shafer owns the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Charles Dowd Box Co. v. CourtneySupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Gulf Offshore Co. v. Mobil Oil Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Palmore v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Kleppe v. New MexicoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Reconstruction Finance Corporation v. Beaver CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Bogle Farms, Inc. v. BacaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
- Walker v. MaruffiNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 1987
- Rosette, Inc. v. United States of Department of the InteriorNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2007
- Roe v. State Ex Rel. State Highway DepartmentNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1985
- Bogle Farms, Inc. v. BacaNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.