Middleton v. California Company
Middleton v. California Company, 112 So. 2d 704 (La. 1959).
Cited by
- Goodrich v. Exxon Co., USA 608 So. 2d 1019 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1992
- Taussig v. Goldking Properties Co. 495 So. 2d 1008 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1986
Authorities cited
Identified automatically; this list may not be exhaustive.
- Carter v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Co. 213 La. 1028
- Eota Realty Co. v. Carter Oil Co. 225 La. 790
- Wier v. Grubb 228 La. 254
Opinion text
HAMITER, Justice (dissenting). According to the well settled jurisprudence of this court a mineral lessee must develop with reasonable diligence every part of the leased premises, having due regard for the interests of all contracting parties, or surrender the lease. Carter et al. v. Arkansas Louisiana Gas Company, 213 La. 1028 , 36 So.2d 26 , Eota Realty Company, Inc. v. Carter Oil Company et al., 225 La. 790 , 74 So.2d 30 and Wier v. Grubb et al., 228 La. 254 , 82 So.2d 1 . In my opinion such requisite has not been satisfied as to the entire 4,600 acres of land involved herein and, hence, the lease of this defendant should be can-celled to the extent of the undeveloped acreage.