J. R. Gilbert v. Union Oil Company of California

Eleventh Circuit

J. R. Gilbert v. Union Oil Company of California

667 F.2d 963, 72 Oil & Gas Rep. 409, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22015

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit

DecidedFebruary 8, 1982

Docket81-7144

StatusPublished

This text of 667 F.2d 963 (J. R. Gilbert v. Union Oil Company of California) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

J. R. Gilbert v. Union Oil Company of California, 667 F.2d 963, 72 Oil & Gas Rep. 409, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22015 (11th Cir. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This appeal involves a summary judgment entered on behalf of appellee and *964 ordering forfeited a group of oil and gas leases held by appellant. The forfeitures were based upon conduct by the appellant during the pendency of state litigation involving questions of title over property from which the mineral rights flowed. Jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship and the case is controlled by Alabama law.

In ruling, the trial court applied the landlord-tenant law of Alabama and did not have before it the subsequent opinion of the Supreme Court of Alabama, dated September 25, 1981, dealing with landlord-tenant law as it applies to oil and gas leases. In a case of first impression, the dispositive issue was phrased as “whether landlord and tenant law, which prevents a tenant from disputing or challenging his landlord’s title to the leased premises, applies to an oil and gas lease.” The answer given is, “We hold that it does not ...” Cross, et al. v. Lowrey, et al., 404 So.2d 645 at 646 (Ala.1981).

The judgment entered in the trial court is VACATED and the matter REMANDED for further proceedings.

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

PER CURIAM:

This appeal involves a summary judgment entered on behalf of appellee and *964 ordering forfeited a group of oil and gas leases held by appellant. The forfeitures were based upon conduct by the appellant during the pendency of state litigation involving questions of title over property from which the mineral rights flowed. Jurisdiction is based upon diversity of citizenship and the case is controlled by Alabama law.

In ruling, the trial court applied the landlord-tenant law of Alabama and did not have before it the subsequent opinion of the Supreme Court of Alabama, dated September 25, 1981, dealing with landlord-tenant law as it applies to oil and gas leases. In a case of first impression, the dispositive issue was phrased as “whether landlord and tenant law, which prevents a tenant from disputing or challenging his landlord’s title to the leased premises, applies to an oil and gas lease.” The answer given is, “We hold that it does not ...” Cross, et al. v. Lowrey, et al., 404 So.2d 645 at 646 (Ala.1981).

The judgment entered in the trial court is VACATED and the matter REMANDED for further proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

667 F.2d 963, 72 Oil & Gas Rep. 409, 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 22015, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-r-gilbert-v-union-oil-company-of-california-ca11-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack