Legal Opinion
Armbruster v. Thetis Energy Corp.
Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided January 27, 1984No. 58879PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BRIGHTMIRE, Presiding Judge.
Do the stipulated facts in this case disclose that plaintiff released a valid oil and gas lease while laboring under a mistake of a material fact which requires cancellation of the release?
The trial court held they did not. We hold they do and reverse the trial court’s summary judgment in favor of two defendants who obtained or hold the release.
I
The facts are that plaintiff, Chester Arm-bruster, owned an undivided Vsth interest in two oil and gas leases executed by defendant lessor, Theodore Pribyl, on August 12, 1975. One lease covered the northeast quarter of a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Davidson v. First Bank & Trust Co., YaleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1976
- Davidson v. First Bank and Trust Co., YaleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1976
- Western Union Telegraph Co. v. GarrettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Humble Oil & Refining Company v. ChappuisLouisiana Court of Appeal · 1970
- Mobil Oil Corporation v. Flag-Redfern Oil CompanyCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1974
3Cited by4 opinions
- Hayes v. E.T.S. Enterprises, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1991
- Harper v. Continental Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- O.G. Harper v. Continental Oil Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1986
- Hayes v. E.T.S. Enterprises, Inc., Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1991