Davis v. Sultan Oil Co.
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
JONES, Presiding Judge:
In this case we must decide whether the trial court correctly granted summary judgment against Appellants in their quest to quiet title to certain mineral interests. We hold it did not.
The facts are recited here only so far as they bear on the present controversy: Robert Schmidt acquired title to two quarter-sections by patent deeds from the United States in 1910 and from the state Commissioners of the Land Office in 1925. He later conveyed half of the mineral interest on both parcels (together comprising the northern half [“N/2”] of the section) to…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bomford v. Socony Mobil Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1968
- Mayhue v. MayhueSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1985
- Abraham v. HomerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Barton v. Alpine Investments, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1979
- Piland v. CraigSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.