West v. Madansky
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from Superior Court, Tulsa County; M. A. Breekenridge, Judge. Action by Max Madansky against O. N. West to cancel assignment of oil lease. Judgment for plaintiff, and both parties bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.
This was an action to cancel an assignment of an oil and gas lease, or rather an assignment of a one-eighth interest in a certain lease, the grounds being that the assignment was obtained through fraud.
Max Madansky, plaintiff below, owned a one-eighth interest in an oil and gas lease on a certain tract of land in Tulsa county, viz., the S. W. Yi of sec. 36, twp. 18 N., R. 12 E.
There were seven other parties, each of whom owned a one-eighth interest in said lease, among whom was O. N. West, defendant below, who, volunteering to act for all the interest-holders, represented to Ma-dansky that…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Thomas v. WhitneyIllinois Supreme Court · 1900
- Stone v. CaseSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Choctaw, O. G. R. Co. v. BurgessSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Scarborough v. SmithSupreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Thomas v. ThomasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Berland's Inc. of Tulsa v. Northside Village Shopping Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1968
- Bynum v. StrainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Moore & Gleason v. TaylorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Welch v. MontgomerySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1949
- Commercial Communications, Inc. v. State Ex Rel. Oklahoma Board of Public AffairsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.