W. O. Schock v. Sam A. Gilpin and Farm Bureau Oil Company, Inc., an Illinois Corporation

Seventh Circuit

W. O. Schock v. Sam A. Gilpin and Farm Bureau Oil Company, Inc., an Illinois Corporation

255 F.2d 912, 9 Oil & Gas Rep. 337, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedJune 2, 1958

Docket12259

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 255 F.2d 912 (W. O. Schock v. Sam A. Gilpin and Farm Bureau Oil Company, Inc., an Illinois Corporation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

W. O. Schock v. Sam A. Gilpin and Farm Bureau Oil Company, Inc., an Illinois Corporation, 255 F.2d 912, 9 Oil & Gas Rep. 337, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409 (7th Cir. 1958).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHNACKENBERG, Circuit Judge.

By his amended complaint filed in the' district court, plaintiff sought cancellation of releases executed by him in favor of defendant Gilpin and a confirmation of plaintiff’s claimed interest in a certain oil lease. Defendants having filed answers, the case was tried by the district court without a jury and it was stipulated that the releases might be set aside and that the sole issue became the nature and extent, if any, of plaintiff’s interest in certain oil production in a tract of" land in White county, Illinois.

The district court made findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered a judgment in favor of defendants, from, which this appeal was taken by plaintiff.

An opinion was filed by the district court, 150 F.Supp. 471. In that opinion, the lower court has adequately and correctly marshaled the pertinent facts and applied to them the correct principles of law. It has reached a right result. We' see no reason to encumber the shelves of the law libraries with an expression of our views. We are content to adopt the opinion of the district court, which we~ now do.

For that reason, the judgment from, which the appeal was taken is affirmed-

Affirmed.

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

SCHNACKENBERG, Circuit Judge.

By his amended complaint filed in the' district court, plaintiff sought cancellation of releases executed by him in favor of defendant Gilpin and a confirmation of plaintiff’s claimed interest in a certain oil lease. Defendants having filed answers, the case was tried by the district court without a jury and it was stipulated that the releases might be set aside and that the sole issue became the nature and extent, if any, of plaintiff’s interest in certain oil production in a tract of" land in White county, Illinois.

The district court made findings of fact and conclusions of law and entered a judgment in favor of defendants, from, which this appeal was taken by plaintiff.

An opinion was filed by the district court, 150 F.Supp. 471. In that opinion, the lower court has adequately and correctly marshaled the pertinent facts and applied to them the correct principles of law. It has reached a right result. We' see no reason to encumber the shelves of the law libraries with an expression of our views. We are content to adopt the opinion of the district court, which we~ now do.

For that reason, the judgment from, which the appeal was taken is affirmed-

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

255 F.2d 912, 9 Oil & Gas Rep. 337, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5409, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/w-o-schock-v-sam-a-gilpin-and-farm-bureau-oil-company-inc-an-ca7-1958.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack