Legal Opinion

Pine v. Duncan

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 9, 1937No. 26559PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHurst, J.

On October 25, 1933, Jim Duncan sued to recover damages caused by pollution of his land by escaping oil and salt water flowing from the premises of defendants in violation of section 11680, O. S. 1931. Upon receipt of $2,100 in settlement, plaintiff dismissed the action against all of the defendants except W. R Pine and the Mid-Continent Petroleum Corporation, plaintiffs in error. Although the evidence showed that polluted water had been flowing down the creek for several years, and destroying two of plaintiff's trees in 1930, the testimony further showed substantial damage to the land…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Whitcomb v. OllerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  2. Keener Oil & Gas Co. v. StewartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Commercial Drilling Co. v. KennedySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. CrinerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  5. A. T. S. F. R. R. Co. v. ChamberlainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1896

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Hobbs v. WatkinsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1971
  2. Fletcher v. City of AltusSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1940
  3. Main v. LevineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
  4. H. F. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co. v. MurphySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
  5. Oklahoma City-Ada-Atoka R. Co. v. RiddleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938

10 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