Beattie v. State ex rel. Grand River Dam Authority
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1ConcurrenceOpala, J.
T1 Although I concur in the court's judgment, I would rest today's pronouncement on the law governing covenants running with the land.1 Because I conclude that the terms of the easement provision in question are not indefinite, I would recommit this cause to the trial court for a post-remand hearing conceptually different from that proposed by the court's plurality opinion.2 The property-law analysis I employ provides a more solid legal foundation for reversal and remand than does the contract-law analysis relied upon by the court.3
T2 The dispositive question tendered on certiorari is whether…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Boyle v. United Technologies Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- United States v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Sunderland v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Russell v. Board of County CommissionersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1997
- Orange & Rockland Utilities, Inc. v. Philwold Estates, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1981
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.