Legal Opinion
May Petroleum v. Corp. Com'n of State of Okl.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided June 9, 1983No. 51259PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
This case comes to us from the Corporation Commission.
After application and hearing the Corporation Commission issued Order No. 132013, which permitted a second well on 640 acre drilling and spacing unit, and allowed it to be drilled off pattern in an attempt to reach a portion of the Morrow-Springer formation that was not encountered in the on-pattern well. The appellant, May Petroleum, has an interest in an adjoining well, which, if the appellant is to be believed, will suffer from uncompensated drainage if the off-pattern well is completed according to Corporation Commission Order No.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- H. F. Wilcox Oil & Gas Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
- Southard v. Oil Equipment CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1956
- Kingwood Oil Company v. Hall-Jones Oil CorporationSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1964
- Robb v. ChapmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- Texas Oil and Gas Corporation v. ReinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1974
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Harry R. Carlile Trust v. Cotton Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
- Turley v. Flag-Redfern Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1989
- Leede Oil & Gas, Inc. v. Corporation CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
- Samson Resources Co. v. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1993
- Harry R. Carlile Trust v. Cotton Petroleum Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.