DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Union Sulphur Co. v. Andrau, 47 So. 2d 38.

14 citing documents.

  • Whitehall Oil Company v. Heard 197 So. 2d 672 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
    LSA-Civil Code Articles 790, 3529, 3546; , ; St.
  • Whitehall Oil Company v. Eckart 197 So. 2d 664 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
    Daggett, Mineral Rights in Louisiana, Chapter VI, "Royalty", especially Sections 60, 63, 64, and 66 (revised edition 1949); 3A Summers, cited above, Section 599; Williams and Meyers, Manual of Oil and Gas Terms, "Royalty", p. 213 (1957).
  • Lee v. Goodwin 174 So. 2d 651 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1965
    used the following language: "* * * since the sale or reservation of a royalty * * * is the mere sale or reservation of a right to share in the production of minerals if and when produced * * *."
  • Frey v. Miller 165 So. 2d 43 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
    35 ], supra; , , and authorities cited therein."
  • Melancon v. Cheramie 138 So. 2d 138 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1962
  • Crown Central Petroleum Corporation v. Barousse 117 So. 2d 575 La. 1960
    Vincent v. Bullock, supra; , and Le Blanc v. Haynesville Mercantile Co., Inc., 230 La.
  • Sun Oil Company v. Guidry 99 So. 2d 424 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    c. The substantial question concerns whether or not Thornton's mineral royalty interest was extinguished by non-user prior to the production of oil in paying quantities on December 6, 1948; such production within the prescriptive period interrupting the accrual of prescription so as to maintain the existence of a royalty interest in favor of its owner at the time, , .
  • Cormier v. Ferguson 92 So. 2d 507 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1957
    709 , , , , Daggett, Louisiana Mineral Rights (1949 Ed.), esp.
  • Le Blanc v. Haynesville Mercantile Company, Inc. 88 So. 2d 377 La. 1956
    It is also-well settled that the right to search and explore, which belongs to the owner of the servitude, is not given to the royalty owner; that the latter must await such time as the land has been developed, and his right is restricted to a sharing in production if and when it is obtained by the landowner or a lessee, Vincent v. Bullock, supra; , 47 So.
  • Smith v. Anisman 85 So. 2d 351 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1956
    632 , ; Union Sulphur Company, Inc., v. Andrau, 1950, , .
  • Union Oil Company of California v. Touchet 86 So. 2d 50 La. 1956
    and numerous authorities therein cited.
  • Grayson v. Lyons, Prentiss & McCord 76 So. 2d 531 La. 1954
    See also, Union Sulphur Co., Inc., v. Andrau, , .
  • Arkansas Fuel Oil Co. v. Sanders 69 So. 2d 745 La. 1953
    646 , ; Union Sulphur Co., , .
  • Ascher v. Midstates Oil Corp. 64 So. 2d 182 La. 1953
    The royalty reservation of the Vincent case was further discussed in Union Sulphur Company, Inc., v. Andrau, , (it involved a similar royalty), the court there commenting: “ * * * we determined that such a sale with royalty reservation, not being forbidden by law, constituted a contract which *823 was to be given legal effect according to the intent of the parties, and concluded that from its nature and by th