Legal Opinion

Maud Oil & Gas Co. v. Bodkin

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 4, 1919No. 8916PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Error from District Court, Pottawatomie County; Chas B. Wilson, Jr., Judge. Action to quiet title by J. B. Bodkin and another against the Maud Oil & Gas Company. Demurrer to answer and cross-petition sustained, and judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant brings error.

1Opinion of the CourtRainey, J.

This action was instituted by J.'B. Bodkin and Lyda Bodkin in the district court of Pottawatomie county, to quiet title to a certain tract of real estate. The Maud Oil & Gas Company answered by alleging that it held an oil and gas lease on the premises through legal assignments; that the same was a valid and subsisting lease and had not been annulled or canceled, and by way of cross-petition asked for a specific performance of its lease, a copy of which was incorporated in the cross-petition. A demurrer was sustained to this answer and cross-petition, and the plaintiffs then introduced their…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Rich v. DonegheySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  2. Northwestern Oil & Gas Co. v. BranineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  3. Brown v. WilsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  4. Dill v. FrazeIndiana Supreme Court · 1907
  5. Southwestern Oil Co. v. McDanielSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Curtis v. HarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
  2. Vanzandt v. HeilmanNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1950
  3. McCray v. Miller &8212 Bland v. BlandSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1919
  4. Nadeau v. Texas CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1937
  5. Blackwell Oil & Gas Co. v. WhitedSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921

2 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