Legal Opinion

Berentz v. Belmont Oil Mining Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided January 30, 1906No. L.A. No. 1261PublishedCited by 16 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

This is an action to foreclose liens of laborers employed in sinking an oil-well. The defendant the Belmont Oil Company owned the south half of a certain quarter-section of land in Kern County known as the “Baradino Placer Mining Claim.” The land was leased to its co-defendant, the Kern King Oil and Development Company, and that company had contracted with the defendants Martin and Berry for its development by sinking one or more oil-wells thereon. The contract between the Kern King Company and Martin and Berry was in writing, but was not recorded. Plaintiff and his assignors were employed by…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Bewick v. MuirCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Williams v. Mountaineer Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
  3. Morse v. De ArdoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  4. Berentz v. Kern King Oil & Development Co.California Supreme Court · 1905

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Sims v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Virginia · 1922
  2. Rankin v. CaldwellIdaho Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Ritter v. RitterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  4. Barton v. Wichita River Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1916
  5. Western Well Works, Inc. v. California Farms Co.California Court of Appeal · 1923

11 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