Brunson v. Carter Oil Co.
Decision Date | 31 May 1919 |
Docket Number | 2539. |
Parties | BRUNSON et al. v. CARTER OIL CO. |
Court | U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Oklahoma |
This case is here on removal from the district court of Stephens county, Okl. Plaintiffs, complaining in their petition, aver that they are the owners of a certain tract of land in Stephens county, Okl.; that on May 18, 1916, A. C. Flowers and wife, Cordie Flowers, being the owners of said tract executed and delivered to defendant an oil and gas mining lease thereon, said lease being 'in consideration of one dollar in hand paid by the lessee and other valuable consideration,' and which contained the following provisions:
'That the lessor, in consideration of one dollar ($1.00) in hand paid by the lessee, and other valuable considerations receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, and the covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, hereby grants, bargains and sells all the oil and gas in and under the land hereinafter described, and grants, demises, leases and lets said land, itself unto the lessee, its successors and assigns, for the sole and only purpose of operating for and producing oil and gas thereon and therefrom, together with rights of way and servitudes for pipe lines, telephone and telegraph lines, for tanks, power houses, stations and fixtures, for producing and caring for such products and housing and boarding employes, and all other rights and privileges necessary, incident to or convenient for the economical operation of said land, alone or conjointly with neighboring land for oil and gas with the right to use free oil, gas or water, but not from lessor's water wells, for such purposes, and with the right of removing, either during or after the term hereof, all and any property and improvements placed or erected on the premises by lessee including the right to pull all casing; * * * to have and to hold said lands, and all rights and privileges granted hereunder to and unto the lessee, its successors and assigns for the term of five (5) years from the date hereof, and as much longer as oil, gas or either of them shall be produced from said lands by lessee in paying quantities. * * *
'In consideration of the premises, the lessee further covenants and agrees:
That thereafter, on or about the 2d day of April, 1917, said Flowers and wife granted and conveyed by deed said land to plaintiffs, which was duly placed of record; and thereafter, on or about the 5th day of May, 1918, said deed, with an abstract of title, as provided in said lease, was furnished to said defendant as evidence of plaintiffs' ownership; that at the time of said purchase by plaintiffs the defendant had an oil and gas lease on said land under the terms of which defendant was to pay the lessor, his heirs and assigns, the sum of $90 by the 19th day of May, 1918, as rental in lieu of development or said lease would terminate on said date; that said payment was not made, and that said lease was then and there terminated.
Defendant admits the execution of said oil and gas mining lease, but avers that it paid the lessor as a bonus for said lease the sum of $540, in cash; that it had drilled no well on said land for oil and gas mining purposes, and that by the terms of such lease the delay rental accrued thereunder on or before May 19, 1917, in the sum of $90; that such sum was paid to the persons entitled thereto before said due date; that in order to continue said lease in force beyond May 19, 1918, it was necessary for it to pay a rental in the sum of $90, and that such rental was not paid or tendered to plaintiffs on or before May 19, 1918, but that 'through inadvertence and mistake' it did pay said rental before said May 19, 1918, to the said A.C. Flowers and wife, the lessors in said lease, instead of to the plaintiffs.
Defendant further averred that:
'During the months of April and May, 1917, it was the owner of more than 10,000 leases for oil and gas mining purposes covering lands in Oklahoma, Kansas, and other states, practically all of which leases provided for the periodical payment of rentals; that the number of leases upon which the defendant pays rentals averaged about 900 per month prior to April, 1917; that during the month of April, 1917, 665 rentals were paid, necessitating an expenditure of $61,968.46; that it is the practice of the defendant to pay said rentals a month in advance of the final date when they may be paid; that the great number of payments thus required of defendant and the varied conditions under which such payments must be made demand a thorough and comprehensive system, insuring the payment thereof of the correct amount and to the proper parties, and the delegation of the duty of keeping proper records and of making such payments to competent and experienced clerks qualified in regard thereto; that accordingly this defendant has created a department designated as the 'Rental Department,' which is in charge of competent and experienced clerks, whose duty it is to make a proper record of each lease as secured, and to note on such record the periodical payments of rentals required under the terms of the particular lease, and showing the persons who are entitled to receive such payment; that a separate sheet calling for these details is provided for each lease, and such sheet is then arranged in a record according to the calendar months, in order that the necessity for the payment of each rental shall be brought to the attention of said rental department at least one month before the particular payment is to be made; that among the details shown on such sheet is a column showing the persons entitled to such rental; that when this defendant is advised that there has been a change in the ownership of the land covered by any of its leases, so that there is a change in the parties who are entitled to receive the rentals accruing on such lease thereafter to accrue, the clerk in the rental department who has charge of such a transaction makes a note on the rental sheet to the effect that the ownership of the land has changed, and the names of the new owners are written on such rental sheet, and shown thereby as entitled to receive the rentals thereafter accruing; that owing to the vast amount of lands which this defendant has leased there are more than a thousand transactions per year of this character; that, owing to the number of leases owned by this defendant, no reference is had to the original file for the purpose of securing the data to make proper rental payments, but such data is procured solely from the rental sheet covering a particular lease; that it would be impracticable to refer in each case to the files, and it is necessary that all necessary information be placed on...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Terminal Ass of St Louis v. United States, 115
...Co., 18 Wall. 272, 302, 21 L. Ed. 841; Bock v. Perkins, 139 U. S. 628, 634, 635, 11 S. Ct. 677, 35 L. Ed. 314; Brunson v. Carter Oil Co. (D. C.) 259 F. 656, 664. The original decree does not require the east side lines to pay the charges for transferring west-bound through freight. No provi......
-
Alaska Consolidated Oil Fields v. Rains
...land. 40 C. J. 1059; Archer's Law & Practice in Oil and Gas Cases, p. 20; Barnsdall v. Owen (C. C. A.) 200 F. 519, 521; Brunson v. Carter Oil Co. (D. C.) 259 F. 656, 664; Frank Oil Co. v. Belleview Gas & Oil Co., 29 Okl. 719, 119 P. 260, 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 487; Kolachny v. Galbreath, 26 Ok......
-
Pluto Oil & Gas Co. v. Miller
...in land," in the cases of Rich v. Doneghey, 71 Okla. 204, 177 P. 86; Garfield Oil Co. v. Champlin, 78 Okla. 91, 189 P. 514; Brunson v. Carter Oil Co., 259 F. 656. See, also, Eldred v. Okmulgee Loan & Trust Co., 22 Okla. 742, 98 P. 929. ¶9 This court, in the case of Carter Oil Co. v. Popp, 7......
-
Gloyd v. Midwest Refining Co.
...conveys no vested interest in the land itself and is only an option to go upon the land and explore for oil and gas. Brunson v. Carter Oil Co. (D. C. Okl.) 259 F. 656; Frank Oil Co. v. Belleview Gas & Oil Co., 29 Okl. 719, 119 P. 260, 43 L. R. A. (N. S.) 487; Deming Inv. Co. v. Lanham, 36 O......