Home Oil & Gas Co. v. Dabney
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Chautauqua district court; J. A. Ferrell, judge pro tem. STATEMENT. The plaintiffs, W. M. Dabney and George L. Lane, were partners engaged in the business of drilling oil and gas wells. The defendants were partners, under the name of the Home Oil & Gas Company, and were the owners of an oil-and-gas lease of land upon which the plaintiffs contracted to drill a well.
Read the full summary
Error from Chautauqua district court; J. A. Ferrell, judge pro tem. STATEMENT. The plaintiffs, W. M. Dabney and George L. Lane, were partners engaged in the business of drilling oil and gas wells. The defendants were partners, under the name of the Home Oil & Gas Company, and were the owners of an oil-and-gas lease of land upon which the plaintiffs contracted to drill a well. After the well had been brought in and turned over to the owners there was an explosion of escaping oil and’gas, resulting in a fire, which damaged and partly destroyed the plaintiffs’ drilling-machinery. This action is…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Porter, J.:
The main contention is that the demurrer should have been sustained. The reasons presented in the brief in support of this claim are far from convincing. We have not, for instance, been able to discover in what way contributory negligence, assumption of risk or the doctrine of “the last clear chance,” which are urged at length and supplemented with nu*824merous citations, can be said to have any application to the facts. We have no hesitation, however, in concluding that the demurrer should have been sustained.
There were no special findings, but…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Lake v. Atlantic WorksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1872
- Stone v. Boston & Albany RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
- Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. ColumbiaSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
- Goodlander Mill Co. v. Standard Oil Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1894
- D. Cleghorn v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Clark v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours Powder Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1915
- Hickert v. WrightSupreme Court of Kansas · 1957
- Salt River Valley Water Users' Ass'n v. CornumArizona Supreme Court · 1937
- Steele v. RappSupreme Court of Kansas · 1958
- Luengene v. Consumers Light, Heat & Power Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.