Legal Opinion

Hughes v. Cantwell

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided August 11, 1976No. 6479PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STEPHEN F. PRESLAR, Chief Justice.

This case involves the interpretation of an oil and gas lease and related questions surrounding the “unless” clause thereof.

The trial Court sitting without a jury, held that the lease had terminated for failure to comply with the “unless” clause. We affirm.

Appellant Hughes leased from the Appellee a fractional mineral interest in Section 49, Block 34, H & TC Railway Company Survey, Ward County, Texas; the parties acted under the belief that the leased interest consisted of an undivided ¼28⅛ interest or a net five mineral acres of the 640-acre section.…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Earp v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  2. Klein v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Myers v. CrenshawTexas Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Willson v. Superior Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1954
  5. Smith v. LiddellTexas Supreme Court · 1963

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Atkinson Gas Co. v. Albrecht, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1994
  2. Sun Operating Ltd. Partnership v. Holt, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1999
  3. Hydrocarbon Management, Inc. v. Tracker Exploration, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1993
  4. Alaskan Crude Corp. v. State, Department of Natural ResourcesAlaska Supreme Court · 2011
  5. Cimarex Energy Co. v. Anadarko Petroleum Corporation, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2019

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API