DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Eota Realty Co. v. Carter Oil Co., 74 So. 2d 30.

13 citing documents.

  • Goodrich v. Exxon Co., USA 608 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
    (1954); Wadkins v. Wilson Oil Corp., 199 La.
  • Taussig v. Goldking Properties Co. 495 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
    (1954) ; Wadkins v. Wilson Oil Corp., 199 La.
  • Andrew Dev. Corp. v. West Esplanade Corp. 347 So. 2d 210 La. 1977
    (1954); Fox v. Doll, 221 La.
  • Johnson v. Thompson 229 So. 2d 131 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1969
    (1954); Hoth v. Schmidt, 220 La.
  • Sellers v. Continental Oil Company 168 So. 2d 435 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1964
    Nunley v. Shell Oil Company, La.App.
  • Schnitt v. Woods 125 So. 2d 451 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1960
    But we do particularly stress another principle which is emphasized in the above, and almost innumerable other cases, that the instrument of lease and the facts constituting the understanding of the parties thereto constitute the essential factors upon which the issue of cancellation, vel non, must be determined; , , citing LSA-C.C.
  • Rushing v. Griffin 121 So. 2d 229 La. 1960
    417 , , $2,500; Eota Realty Co., , , $4,500.
  • Sohio Petroleum Co. v. Millers 112 So. 2d 695 La. 1959
    * * * ” Later, the above-stated principles were affirmed in Eota Realty Company, , and Wier v. Grubb, 228 La.
  • Sohio Petroleum Company v. Miller 112 So. 2d 695 La. 1959
    * * *" Later, the above-stated principles were affirmed in Eota Realty Company, , and Wier v. Grubb, 228 La.
  • Middleton v. California Company 112 So. 2d 704 La. 1959
    1028 , , Eota Realty Company, , and Wier v. Grubb et al., 228 La.
  • Melancon v. Texas Company 89 So. 2d 135 La. 1956
    This Court has allowed attorney’s fees in suits for partial cancellation of leases in three recent cases: , ; Wier v. Grubb, 228 La.
  • Nunley v. Shell Oil Company 86 So. 2d 62 La. 1956
    wherein this Court ordered a partial cancellation of the lease on the ground that no well had been drilled on the property and the primary term had expired, attorney's fees were allowed under the provisions of LSA-R.S.
  • Nunley v. Shell Oil Company 76 So. 2d 111 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1955
    nly of the expected royalty from production pursuant to the lease, but of the privilege of making some other arrangement for availing himself of the mineral content of the land.'" The rule set forth in the Carter case to the effect that the main consideration of a mineral lease is the development of leased *115 premises was reiterated in the recent case of Eota Realty Co., , , in which the cancellation of the lease on a portion of the property covered thereby was sustained on the ground of failu