Cited by

Opinions in Louisiana that cite Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co., 91 So. 765.

36 citing documents.

Horton v. Mobley 578 So. 2d 977 La. Ct. App. 2d Cir. 1991
Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
EL Burns Co., Inc. v. Cashio 302 So. 2d 297 La. 1974
389 (1929); Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Placid Oil Company v. Taylor 291 So. 2d 892 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1974
5 Cir. 1937); Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Hanszen v. Cocke 246 So. 2d 200 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1971
Nabors Oil & Gas Co. vs. Louisiana Oil & Refining Co., , 91 So.
LeBleu v. LeBleu 206 So. 2d 551 La. Ct. App. 3d Cir. 1967
859 (1929); Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Hinchee v. Long Bell Petroleum Co. 103 So. 2d 84 La. 1958
742 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Barnsdall Oil Co. v. Miller 69 So. 2d 21 La. 1953
Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Neuss Hesslein & Co. v. Louisville & N. R. 50 So. 2d 855 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1951
561 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Union Sulphur Co. v. Andrau 47 So. 2d 38 La. 1950
207 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Gulf Refining Co. v. Orr 22 So. 2d 269 La. 1945
Counsel for Mrs. Orr in their brief filed in the Court of Appeal say that the present case is similar to the case of Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
McDonald v. Richard 13 So. 2d 712 La. 1943
3459, 3460, 3549; Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co., on rehearing, , 91 So.
Martel v. A. v. Eder Co. 6 So. 2d 335 La. 1942
3459, 3460, 3549; Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co., on rehearing, , 91 So.
Martel v. Hunt 197 So. 402 La. 1940
See Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Grimm v. Pugh 197 So. 641 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1940
[361], on page 398 [ , on page 778], where he said: ‘A majority of the members of this court did not concur in the expressions in the opinion originally handed down in this case, to the effect that - the Louisiana Oil Refining Company after acquiring the oil and gas lease from plaintiff, could not acquire an oil and gas lease from the wid
Tyson v. Surf Oil Co. 196 So. 336 La. 1940
623 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Venta v. Ferrara 196 So. 550 La. 1940
Hightower v. Maritzky 195 So. 518 La. 1940
3459, 3460, 3549; Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co., on rehearing, , 91 So.
Munn v. Wadley 189 So. 561 La. 1939
It was so decided in Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Co., on rehearing, , 91 So.
Foscue v. Mitchell 182 So. 740 La. 1938
The case of Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Arkansas-Louisiana Gas Co. v. Parker Oil Co. 183 So. 229 La. 1938
In the case of Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Sparks v. Dan Cohen Co. 175 So. 590 La. 1937
But that is not applicable to an oil and gas lease, because, in Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Gulf Refining Co. of Louisiana v. Glassell 171 So. 846 La. 1936
229 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Ruth v. Buwe 168 So. 776 La. 1936
Ruth v. Buwe 168 So. 776 La. 1936
Defelice v. Autin 159 So. 648 La. Ct. App. 5th Cir. 1935
229 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
United Gas Public Service Co. v. Roy 147 So. 705 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1933
362 , , considered the effect of a second reservation of oil and gas rights by one who originally held fee-simple title to a tract of land.
Coyle v. Louisiana Gas & Fuel Co. 144 So. 737 La. 1932
o defendant for the cost of the extraction of the gasoline in proportion to the amount thereof received by *1009 him, for article 2314 of the Civil Code provides that: “He to whom .property is restored must refund to the person who possessed it, even in bad faith, all he had necessarily expended for the preservation of the property.” Nabors Oil & , 384 to 387, 91 So.
Mulhern v. Hayne 132 So. 659 La. 1931
397 , , this court held as follows: “The period of prescription may be interrupted by a written acknowledgment on the part of the obligor; but, when so interrupted, it begins anew from the date of the acknowledgment.” Plaintiff’s suit is based upon the ten-year prescription liberandi causa.
Palmer Corporation of Louisiana v. Moore 132 So. 229 La. 1930
676 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Danciger v. Reed 125 So. 494 La. Ct. App. 1st Cir. 1929
Lewis v. Bodcaw Lumber Co. 120 So. 859 La. 1929
on the sub- ■ ject, one of which clearly maintains that a mere acknowledgment, in a sale of land, that *1073 it is sold subject to a previously recorded sale or reservation of the mineral rights in favor of a third party, does riot of itself interrupt the prescription of ten years which may be accruing for nonuse of the mineral rights, viz.: Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Powell v. Rapides Parish Police Jury 115 So. 667 La. 1928
561 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Sample v. Louisiana Oil Refining Corporation 111 So. 336 La. 1927
“This suit is an aftermath of the suit of Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil Refining Corporation, to be found reported in , 91 So.
Vander Sluys v. Finfrock 103 So. 730 La. 1925
207 ; Nabors Oil & , 91 So.
Exchange Nat. Bank v. Head 99 So. 272 La. 1924
And again in Nabors Oil & Gas Co. v. Louisiana Oil & Refining Co., , 91 South.
Sellington v. Producers' Oil Co. 92 So. 742 La. 1922
The decision in Nabors Oil & , 91 South.