[Miscellaneous Investigative Reports and Memorandum re: Clay Shaw, David Ferrie, Layton Martens] (8 of 17)
Images (108)
Showing first 60 of 108 pages.
Document
| id |
id
7564849
|
|---|---|
| contentType |
contentType
document
|
| source |
source
import
|
Source image fields (6)
Extracted text
OCR Page 1 of 10818
19
session of the leased tract, the court said that even with-
Nabors Oil and Gas Refining Company U. Louisiana Oil
out such express warranty the lessors had the duty to
Refining Company, we find the court holding that:
prevent the lessee's eviction. Article 2501 in the Sales
The doctrine that an ordinary lessee cannot dis-
section of the Code was used as authority for this.
pute the title of his lessor during the time of the
lease has no application to a contract in the form of
In Cochran U. Gulf Refining Company the court
an oil and gas lease by which a person acquires
identified the mineral lease as being more the sale of
mineral rights, it being more like a sale than an
a real right than an ordinary lease contemplating OC-
ordinary lease.
cupancy of a house or land. And in Wiley U. Davis43 it
stated that the granting of a mineral lease on property
In the comparatively early case of Rives U. Gulf Re-
constituted a dismemberment of the property amounting
fining Company of Lovisiana18 the court held that the
to a partial alienation of it.
ordinary rules of lease could not apply where minerals
were involved. It made reference to the case of R. F.
On the other hand a number of cases44 have stated that
Wadkins U. Atlanta,43 in which it had denominated the
in the oil and gas lease the payment of royalty is the pay-
mineral interests as a real right. Oil and gas, said the
ment of rent and not the payment of price for oil. How-
court, is as much a part of the realty as coal or stone,
ever, in Gulf Refining Company U. Garrett45 Chief Justice
and the surface owner owns them until they escape from
O'Niell, referring to these cases, said:
beneath his land. However, it pointed out, the minerals
Notwithstanding the royalty stipulated in an oil
cannot be owned separately from the soil. This opinion
and gas lease may be considered as rent for certain
would place the mineral lease in between its present ex-
purposes, or in some aspects, it is well settled now
treme positions in Texas and Louisiana jurisprudence, for
that the royalty stipulated in an oil or gas lease is
it describes the instrument as granting less than a cor-
not to be compared with the rent of a house or farm.
poreal estate but more than a mere personal right.
General statements by the court, as to whether the lease
is a sale or not, can be found pointing in either direction.
The language of Sommerville, J., in delineating the
In Spence U. Lucas46 the court stated that mineral leases
instrument is worth repeating:
would be construed as leases and not as sales. Later, in
Gas and oil leases and contracts are a part by
42
139 La. 1010, 72 So. 718 (1916).
themselves. There is scarcely any comparison be-
43
164 La. 1090, 115 So. 280 (1927).
tween them and the ordinary farm or house lease,
44
Board of Commissioners of Caddo Levee District v. Pure Oil
Company, 167 La. 801, 120 So. 373; Logan V. State Gravel Com-
47
151 La. 361, 91 So. 765 (1922).
pany, 158 La. 105, 103 So. 526: Roberson V. Pioneer Gas Com-
48
133 La. 178, 62 So. 623 (1913).
pany, 173 La. 313, 137 So. 46 (1931).
49
This case unreported. See appendix of Dimick's "Louisiana
45
209 La. 674, 25 So. (2d) 329 (1945).
Law of Oil and Gas", F. F. Hansell & Bro., New Orleans, 1922,
46
138 La. 763, 70 So. 796 (1915).
for report.
Relations
belongs_to