Legal Opinion
Higgins v. Grant
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 26, 1931No. Docket No. 340PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, J.
This is an action for damages for breach of contract. The plaintiff was the owner of 160 acres of land in Kern County, acquired under an agricultural patent which reserved the oil rights to the government. She was also the owner of a “Prospecting Permit” issued by the department of the interior, giving her the right to prospect for oil or gas on this same property. As first party, she entered into an agreement with one J. C. Grant, as second party, which agreement was later assigned by Grant to Julian Petroleum Corporation. This agreement, after reciting that the first party is the owner of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Fraley, Adm'r v. WilkinsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Ardizonne v. ArcherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
- Taylor v. North Pacific Coast RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
- Mollohan v. PattonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1921
- Okmulgee Producing & Refining Co. v. BaughSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Fisher v. HamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1975
- Chaparkas v. WebbCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
- Kennedy v. ReeceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
- Bisnett v. HollisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Valley Vista Land Co. v. Nipomo Water & Sewer Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968