Beveridge v. Fairfax Oil Corporation

1936 OK 535, 62 P.2d 1171, 178 Okla. 379, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 833
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided September 29, 1936·No. No. 27100.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A motion to dismiss was filed in this cause on the ground that this was an appeal from an order and judgment of the district court granting a permit to drill an oil and gas well, and that pending the appeal the well has been drilled, and that under the decisions of this court in Westgate Oil Co. v. Refiners Production Co., 172 Okla. 260, 44 P. (2d) 993, and Reinhart & Donovan Co. v. Refiners Production Co., 175 Okla. 522, 53 P. (2d) 1116, where a judgment granting a permit to drill was not superseded and the well was drilled and production commenced pending the appeal, the question of whether the permit should have been granted is moot. We are of the opinion that those authorities fully cover the ease, and the appeal is therefore dismissed.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, Y. C. J., and BAYLESS, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Beveridge v. Fairfax Oil Corporation, 1936 OK 535, 62 P.2d 1171, 178 Okla. 379, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 833 (Okla. 1936).

1936 OK 535 (Beveridge v. Fairfax Oil Corporation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. Grand River Dam Authority
720 P.2d 713 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1986)