Grounds v. Northern Natural Gas Company
| Decision Date | 11 February 1964 |
| Docket Number | 7588.,No. 7580-7584,7580-7584 |
| Citation | 327 F.2d 1003 |
| Parties | Ralph GROUNDS et al., Appellants, v. NORTHERN NATURAL GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Northern Helex Company, a corporation, and Texaco, Inc., Appellees. Ralph GROUNDS et al., Appellants, v. NATIONAL HELIUM CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellee. O. W. HEGER et al., Appellants, v. CITIES SERVICE GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. Katherine R. ADAMS et al., Appellants, v. CITIES SERVICE GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. PAN AMERICAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION, a corporation, Appellant, v. CITIES SERVICE GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. Bloyd BURGESS et al., Appellants, v. CITIES SERVICE GAS COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
James E. Grigsby, Oklahoma City, Okl., for appellants, Royalty Owners.
Byron M. Gray, Topeka, Kan., for National Helium Corp.
Joe Rolston, Wichita, Kan., for Northern Natural Gas Co. and Northern Helex Co.
Charles Lindberg, Oklahoma City, Okl., for Socony Mobil Oil Co.
Charles V. Wheeler, Oklahoma City, Okl., for Cities Service Gas Co.
George C. Spradling, Wichita, Kan., for Pan American Petroleum Corp.
Malcolm Miller, Wichita, Kan., for Texaco, Inc.
Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and PICKETT, LEWIS, BREITENSTEIN, HILL, and SETH, Circuit Judges.
These appeals are from interlocutory orders affirming jurisdiction of the United States District Court for the District of Kansas and from orders denying motions for the dissolution of injunctions. Such orders are all severally affirmed. This action is not intended to decide any issue going to the merits of any case.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Northern Natural Gas Company v. Grounds
...of ownership under the mineral leases of the helium produced and marketed." This ruling was affirmed in Grounds v. Northern Natural Gas Co., 327 F.2d 1003 (10th Cir. 1964) (per curiam). Subsequent to this ruling, the subject fund was more precisely defined and enlarged. By order filed Janua......
-
Northern Natural Gas Company v. Grounds, No. 307-69 to 322-69
...Motions to dismiss the interpleaders on jurisdictional grounds were denied by the trial court and we affirmed. Grounds v. Northern Natural Gas Company, 10 Cir., 327 F.2d 1003. The remaining two actions were brought by named landowners, as representatives of their class, against the United S......
-
Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. CENTRAL-PENN NAT. BK.
...who invokes interpleader and what he asserts to be the subject matter of the controversy." Id. at 652 And in Northern Natural Gas Co. v. Grounds, 327 F.2d 1003 (10th Cir. 1964), 292 F.Supp. 619 (D.Kan.1968), 441 F.2d 704 (10th Cir. 1971), cert. den., 404 U.S. 951, 92 S.Ct. 268, 30 L. Ed.2d ......
-
Oxy USA Inc. v. Panhandle Eastern Pipe Line Co., Civ. A. No. 91-4055-S.
...produced and marketed.'" 292 F.Supp. at 638. The court's determination was upheld by the Tenth Circuit in Grounds v. Northern Natural Gas Co., 327 F.2d 1003 (10th Cir.1964). In the instant case Williams contends there is not a specific identified fund against which claims are asserted, such......