Legal Opinion
Carrothers v. Stanolind Oil and Gas Company
District Court, N.D. Texas
Decided September 14, 1955No. Civ. A. 1378PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ESTES, District Judge.
In this ease both parties have moved for summary judgment and conceded that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact. Thus, it is for the Court to decide the case as a matter of law. 3 Barron and Holtzoff, Federal Practice & Procedure, Sec. 1239. The material facts are that on July 16, 1948, plaintiff executed an oil and gas lease to prior assignors of defendant, Stanolind Oil and Gas Company, (hereinafter referred to as Stanolind) on the “unless” form of lease; that Stanolind assigned a portion of this lease by “farmout agreement” obligating its assignee to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Waggoner Estate v. Sigler Oil Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1929
- The Texas Company v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Texas Co. v. DavisTexas Supreme Court · 1923
- Rorer Iron Co. v. TroutSupreme Court of Virginia · 1887
- Morriss v. First Nat. Bank of MissionCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1952
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Long v. Magnolia Petroleum CompanyNebraska Supreme Court · 1958
- Minnie E. Haby, Joined Pro Forma by Her Husband, Homer H. Haby v. Stanolind Oil and Gas CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1956
- McBean v. McBeanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1963
- Mary Ellen Francis Vernon and Husband, H. J. Vernon v. Union Oil Company of CaliforniaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1959
- Illinois Migrant Council v. Campbell Soup Co.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.