Legal Opinion
Scoville v. De Bretteville
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 20, 1942No. Civ. 2963PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.
Plaintiffs brought this action to enjoin defendants from interfering with their drilling and production operations in connection with an oil well known as “Treasure No. 8,” for an accounting of the receipts from and disbursements made in connection with this well, for judgment for any moneys found due them, and for a receiver pendente lite to take charge of and operate the well.
The receiver was appointed and the order appointing him was stayed by an appropriate appeal bond. The case was tried on its merits and the judgment before us for review was rendered in which the receiver was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lemm v. Stillwater Land & Cattle Co.California Supreme Court · 1933
- Adams v. Petroleum Midway Co., Ltd.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Tide Water Associated Oil Co. v. CurtinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Smith v. CarlstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Alta Planing Mill Co. v. GarlandCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Gardner v. FliegelIdaho Supreme Court · 1969
- United States v. Adamant Co. And Four Other CasesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1952
- Wynn v. Treasure Co.California Court of Appeal · 1956
- Gillett v. GillettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
- Isenberg v. SalyerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.