Goodall v. Trigg Drilling Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Per curiam
¶ 1 Karl L. Goodall claims an overriding royalty interest in a well formerly operated by Trigg Drilling Company, Inc. The well has been shut in. Goodall sues for an accounting and his share of the production. Trigg challenges Goodall’s claim to ownership of the interest, and urges that in any event Goodall’s suit is barred by limitations.
¶ 2 The primary questions to be settled here are whether, the operator, Trigg, had a duty to inform the royalty owner, Goodall, of production, and, if so, whether Trigg’s failure to inform Goodall tolled the statute of limitations. We find that neither party…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Flanders v. Crane Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1984
- Ludey v. Pure Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Olansen v. Texaco Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1978
- Becker v. State Ex Rel. Department of Public WelfareSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- Jones v. JonesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1969
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Howell v. Texaco Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2004
- Krug v. Helmerich & Payne, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2013
- Nichols v. NicholsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2009
- Samson Resources Co. v. SemCrude, L.P. (In re SemCrude, L.P.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · 2009
- KRUG v. HELMERICH & PAYNE, INC.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2015
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.