Legal Opinion
John v. Elberta Oil Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided July 18, 1932No. Docket No. 8303PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
TUTTLE, J., pro tem.
This is an action to- quiet title to real property and to forfeit a lease upon the same. Judgment was entered forfeiting the lease, and defendants appeal therefrom.
The complaint contains two causes of action: One, a simple action to quiet title, and the other setting up facts which it is alleged constitute a forfeiture of the lease. The answer, after denying the allegations of the complaint, sets up five defenses, all of which, except the third, are based upon waiver or estoppel. The lease in question is in the usual form of an oil and gas lease. The following portions…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Consumers Gas Trust Co. v. LittlerIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Acme Oil and Mining Co. v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1903
- Hall v. AugurCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Consumers Gas Trust Co. v. InkIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Johnson v. ArmstrongWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1917
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- MacCo Construction Co. v. FickertCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
- Extension Oil Co. v. Richfield Oil Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Baldwin v. KubetzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
- Martin v. Pacific Southwest Royalties, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1940
- Alexander v. OatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.