Legal Opinion

Pure Oil Co. v. Gear

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 11, 1938No. 26009PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHurst, J.

This is an action to'recover for damage alleged to have been sustained as a result of the poisoning of plaintiffs’ cattle by salt water which defendant had permitted to flow from its oil well to a receiving pond or earthen tank. The cause was tried to a jury. Motion of defendant for judgment based on the opening statement of counsel for plaintiffs was denied. Demurrer to the evidence of plaintiffs and a motion for directed verdict at the close of all the evidence were likewise overruled. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiffs, upon which judgment was rendered, and defendant brings this…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Tidal Oil Co. v. PeaseSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  2. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  3. Marland Oil Co. v. HubbardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
  4. Texas Co. v. MosshamerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  5. Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. HowardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Warren Petroleum Corp. v. MartinTexas Supreme Court · 1954
  2. General Crude Oil Company v. AikenTexas Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Sanford v. Arjay Oil Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Sinclair Prairie Oil Co. v. PerryCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1945
  5. McClaren v. G. S. Robins & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1942

35 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