Anderson-Kerr, Inc. v. Van Meter

• Decision Date: 07 March 1933
• Docket Number: 23830.
• Citation: 19 P.2d 1068,162 Okla. 176,1933 OK 156
• Parties: ANDERSON-KERR, Inc., v. VAN METER et al.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

19 P.2d 1068

162 Okla. 176, 1933 OK 156

ANDERSON-KERR, Inc., v. VAN METER et al.

No. 23830.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

March 7, 1933

Syllabus by the Court.

1. An ordinance of a city making it unlawful to drill or operate oil and gas wells within 300 feet of the outer line of an oil and gas drilling zone does not contravene the provisions of the Constitution of the state of Oklahoma or the provisions of the Constitution of the United States. It is a proper exercise of the police power of the city, which power extends not only to the provisions of the public safety, health, and morals but to the common convenience, prosperity, and welfare of the public.

2. Where an appeal from the order of the board of adjustment to the district court in reference to the granting or refusing a permit to drill an oil and gas well within the territory prohibited by the ordinance of the city is of purely equitable cognizance, the judgment of the district court will not be reversed by the Supreme Court unless the judgment be clearly against the weight of the evidence.

3. Plaintiffs sought a permit to drill an oil and gas well on nondrilling territory in the city of Oklahoma City, in violation of the zone ordinances of said city. The building superintendent of said city denied plaintiff such permit. Plaintiff thereafter, as provided by said ordinances appealed to the board of adjustment of said city, which board after a hearing granted said permit. The city of Oklahoma City and others appealed therefrom to the district court of said county, which court denied such permit. Thereafter plaintiff appealed from the judgment of the district court to this court: Held, from the facts and circumstances presented by the record that there was no justification for the board of adjustment to relax the provisions of the ordinance fixing the zone limit in reference to drilling the oil and gas well in question, and that the judgment of the district court was proper in denying such permit.

Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; R. P. Hill, Judge.

Proceedings by Anderson-Kerr, Inc., to obtain a permit to drill an oil and gas well within the corporate limits of the city of Oklahoma City. J. W. Van Meter, Building Superintendent refused the permit, and the Board of Adjustment granted the application, whereupon the Building Superintendent and certain interested property owners appealed to the District Court. From a judgment of the District Court denying the application for the permit, the applicant appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Shirk Danner & Phelps, G. A. Paul, and Floyd C. Dooley, all of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.

W. H Brown, Municipal Counselor, and Harlan T. Deupree, Asst. Municipal Counselor, both of Oklahoma City, for J. W. Van Meter.

Twyford & Smith and Edward Howell, all of Oklahoma City, for defendants in error C. H. Wright, Reinhart & Donovan Co., and Jameson & Grimes, Inc.

C. H. Ruth, of Oklahoma City, for F. A. Ruth and others.

McNEILL Justice.

This is an appeal from the district court of Oklahoma county involving a permit to drill an oil and gas well within the corporate limits of Oklahoma City on a platted tract of ground of approximately 63/100 of an acre, and within nondrilling territory, in violation of the ordinances of said city.

Plaintiff in error acquired a lease on the premises in question on December 16, 1931, and made application to J. W. Van Meter, building superintendent of said city, to drill a well on the same, the proposed location of said well being 50 feet east of the east line of Byers avenue which is the west line of the drilling zone, referred to in the ordinance of said city as U-7 Use, or oil and gas district. It is conceded that the action of the building superintendent in denying the permit was proper in that he had no discretion to consider the equities of any of the parties. The plaintiff in error, being the lessee, appealed from the action of the building superintendent to the board of adjustment. Notices were thereafter given to the owners of property contiguous to that described in the lease as provided by the ordinances of said city. A hearing was had by the board of adjustment and on February 29, 1932, an order was made by the board of adjustment directing the building superintendent to issue a permit to plaintiff in error to drill an oil and gas well on said premises. The board of adjustment as set forth in the brief of plaintiff in error made findings in part as follows:

"The Board further finds that the leasehold area above described, upon which Anderson-Kerr, Inc., applies for permit to drill a well, consists of less than two and one-half acres in area of platted land, and is not of sufficient contiguous area to constitute an oil and gas drilling 'block' for which permit should be issued.

The Board further finds that permits have heretofore been granted to other parties than plaintiff, either by order of the Board of Adjustment or by order of the District Court of Oklahoma County on appeal from orders of the Board of Adjustment on adjacent and contiguous tracts of land within the U-7 zone to said Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, except that portion of the old bed of the North Canadian River immediately adjoining this described area on the east.

The Board further finds that wells upon the adjoining and adjacent land for which permits have heretofore been granted will drain the oil and gas from under the premises on which plaintiff holds an oil and gas lease and asks for a permit.

The Board further finds that if no permit be issued to plaintiff to drill a well upon said Lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, that the oil and gas thereunder will be drained into the adjoining wells and plaintiff and its lessors denied the right to recover any oil and/or gas underlying said land, and a great injustice worked upon plaintiff and its lessors, the owners of said land.

The Board further finds that there is a tract of land lying adjoining and adjacent to said lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 which is a part of the old bed of the North Canadian River, and that for the purpose of constituting a drilling block that portion of the bed of the North Canadian River lying parallel between the center of the North Canadian River bed and the east line of said lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 should be attached to said lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 for the purpose of constituting a drilling block.

The Board further finds that according to the verified application filed herein and the evidence received, that plaintiff herein owns an oil and gas mining lease on more than 51 per cent of the total area of said drilling block, as last above described, and that a permit to drill one oil and/or gas well thereon should be granted to Anderson-Kerr, Inc., in order to avoid the working of an unnecessary hardship upon it and the present owners, of said land and that the granting of such permit would be within the intent and purpose of said ordinance of said city and would not be contrary to the public interest."

The city of Oklahoma City, C. H. Wright, receiver of Sunray Oil Company, Sunray Oil Company, Reinhart-Donovan Corporation, Jameson-Grimes, Inc., a corporation, being the owners of oil and gas leases and premises contiguous to or in close proximity to said premises, appealed to the district court of said county from the decision of the board of adjustment. The defendant F. A. Ruth, as a taxpayer, also joined in said appeal. Thereafter the case was tried in the district court, of Oklahoma county, and judgment rendered on May 7, 1932, reversing the order made by the board of adjustment. The court made no special findings, but found from the evidence that the permit heretofore granted by said board should be set aside and held for naught and denied to plaintiff in error a permit to drill an oil well on said property. The lessee, Anderson-Kerr, Inc., plaintiff in error, has appealed from said judgment to this court.

The premises in question are described as lots 1, 2, 3, 4, block 4, second Riverside addition to Oklahoma City. It does not appear to be disputed that the Western Paving Company for a number of years was the owner of blocks 1, 2, 6, 7, and 8 of East Grand avenue addition consisting of about 10 acres and the aforesaid lots in said block 4. The aforesaid 5 blocks, to wit: 1, 2, 6, 7 and 8, were in the bend of the old channel on the east, north, and west, and bounded on the south by the main line, and spur tracks of the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company.

Prior to March 6, 1931, the Western Paving Company executed a lease on aforesaid five blocks to the Slick interests which was later assigned to the Wepaco Leases, Inc., a corporation, and on the same date the said Wepaco Leases Co., Inc., applied to the building superintendent for a permit to drill a second well, which was to be located on the south of the boundary line of lot 1, block 1, of said addition. Prior to the aforesaid application of plaintiff in error permission had thus been obtained to drill two wells on said blocks 1, 2, 6, 7, and 8. The permit to drill said second well was granted on April 13, 1931, by the board of adjustment and an appeal was taken therefrom by the Western Paving Company to the district court of Oklahoma county by reason of the inclusion of the north half of the right of way to the south. The case was tried in said district court on December 11, 1931, and the company secured a permit for its well No. 2.

Four days thereafter on December 15, 1931, and after said hearing in said district court, the Western Paving Company gave a quitclaim deed to G. S. Simpson for the four lots in question. On the following day, December 16, 1931, said G. S Simpson and wife executed an oil and gas lease to Anderson-Kerr, Inc., plaintiff in error herein. It also appears that said...