PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
POLYCARP L. BROUSSARD, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Appellee Broussard, as plaintiff below, brought this action in a state court for the cancellation of an oil, gas and mineral lease as to part of the land covered thereby (29.526 acres). Appellants, Phillips Petroleum Company and others, defendants below, removed the case to the United States District Court which granted appellee’s motion for a judgment on the pleadings. Appellants attack this judgment on four grounds, which are the identical grounds upon which they relied in the lower court.
The judge in the trial below, reciting that “both sides candidly concede that there is no factual dispute,” wrote a careful and exhaustive opinion1 dealing with each of the legal propositions relied upon on this appeal. A reading of the record and briefs convinces us that the case was fully presented by the pleadings, that the language of the crucial “Pugh Clause” (160 F.Supp. 907) is clear and unambiguous, that the case was correctly decided and that the opinion of the trial judge accurately and adequately deals with all of the points relied upon here. For the reasons and upon the considerations set out in said opinion (and cf. Mattison v. Trotti, 5 Cir., 1959, 262 F. 2d 339) the judgment is
Affirmed.
. Broussard v. Phillips Petroleum Co., D.C.1958, 160 F.Supp. 905.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rogers v. Westhoma OIL Co., 291 F.2d 726 (10th Cir. 1961)
-
OIL, Chem. & Atomic Workers Int'l Union, AFL-CIO v. DELTA Ref. Co., 277 F.2d 694 (6th Cir. 1960)
-
Dunn v. Retail Clerks Int'l Ass'n, AFL-CIO, 299 F.2d 873 (6th Cir. 1962)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mattison v. Trotti, 262 F.2d 339 (5th Cir. 1959)