Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion
On Motions for Rehearing.
The motion asserts that our statement that, “the west line of the Dogie lease is 7600 varas east of the west line of 3 as located from Dod’s monumented S. W. corner of 70 and N. W. corner of 3,” is not supported by the evidence. We have carefully re-examined this matter and adhere to the statement as written.
It is further urged that regardless of inaccuracies in these figures and calculations, our analysis of the Supreme Court’s opinion in the Stanolind Case, implicit from these calculations, is “absolutely immaterial.” In this connection it is urged by the state that…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Seamans Oil Co. v. GuyTexas Supreme Court · 1925
- Clemenger v. FlesherCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1916
- Bauman v. JaffrayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1894
- Seamans Oil Company v. GuyTexas Supreme Court · 1924
- Stine v. Producers' Oil Co.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1918
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.