Gulf Refining Co. of Louisiana v. Vincent Oil Co.

Decision Date21 February 1911
Docket Number2,165.
Citation185 F. 87
PartiesGULF REFINING CO. OF LOUISIANA et al. v. VINCENT OIL CO.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit

On Rehearing, March 14, 1911.

D Edward Greer and Amos L. Beaty, for appellants.

John Hamman, Presley K. Ewing, and W. H. Gill, for appellee.

Before PARDEE, McCORMICK, and SHELBY, Circuit Judges.

PARDEE Circuit Judge.

This is a suit brought in equity for the specific performance of a certain oil lease and for the cancellation of conflicting leases and titles, and the prayer is for an injunction pendente lite, a permanent injunction, the appointment of a receiver, the cancellation of contracts, and for general relief. It is brought to this court by an appeal from a decree as follows, to wit:

'Vincent Oil Company, Complainant, v. Gulf Refining Company of Louisiana and Others.
'No 553. In Equity.
'This day this cause came on to be heard upon the complainant's amended bill as filed herein, the defendants' demurrers thereto as filed herein, and the defendants' answers to show cause against the preliminary relief as prayed by said bill, after due and reasonable notice to the defendants, and appearance by them, and was argued by counsel, and thereupon the court, upon consideration thereof, ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows, viz.:
'That decision upon said demurrers be and is hereby reserved by the court. That Underwood Nazro, who has the necessary qualifications, be and he is hereby appointed as conditional receiver herein, with authority to exercise the limited powers to him hereby granted, upon his duly qualifying as such by filing the requisite oath and giving bond, payable to the clerk of this court and his successors in office, in terms of law, for the faithful performance of his duties as such receiver, with good and sufficient security, to be approved by the court or said clerk, in the sum of one thousand ($1,000.00) dollars.
'That said conditional receiver so appointed be and he is hereby authorized, and he is directed, to take and keep accurate accounts of all oil or other minerals extracted, produced, or marketed by the defendants, Gulf Refining Company of Louisiana, Sabine Oil & Mineral Company, and S. A. Emerson, and each of them, from the lands described in the lease from A. J. Vincent and cograntors to H. T. Staiti, bearing date May 5, 1909, as alleged in complainant's said bill, and also of the prices obtained therefor, and the reasonable expenses incurred in producing the same into the tanks and pipe lines, and to file his monthly statements thereof among the papers of this cause, so that at the final hearing the court will have before it the exact amounts which may enter into a full accounting.
'That said receiver is hereby authorized to require said above-named defendants, and they are each directed at his request, under penalty of law in case of disobedience, to furnish him with sworn schedules and statements and such inspection of their books and documents in that behalf from time to time as will enable or aid him to prepare accurately the accounts hereinbefore required of him.
'That said receiver is further authorized to require of above-named defendants, and each of them, and they are severally directed at his request, from time to time, to furnish bonds, payable to the clerk of this court and his successors in office, for the benefit of whom the court may finally decree herein, with good and sufficient security, and to be conditioned and in such amounts as he may determine in reasonable proportion to the amounts to be protected, compelling the obligors to account for all revenues or moneys derived from said land from oil or other minerals produced therefrom, in the event complainant succeeds in maintaining this suit.
'That said receiver be and he is hereby further authorized, and he is required, to vigilantly inquire into and report to the court for its action, should necessity seem to require, whether said above-named defendants, or any of them, or their agents, servants, or workmen in that behalf, are disposing of said oil or other minerals for less than its reasonable market value at such times and place, or are failing to exercise reasonable diligence in their drilling to protect said land here in question and its property lines.
'That inasmuch as said lessors, A. J. Vincent and cograntors, are entitled under each of the opposing leases herein to one-eighth (1/8) royalty of the oil produced and certain proportions of other
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • In re Wiand
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • September 29, 2011
    ...satisfied. Judge Pizzo's detailed review states as follows13 :A receiver, like Wiand, is a creature of equity. Gulf Ref. Co. of La. v. Vincent Oil Co., 185 F. 87 (5th Cir. 1911).14 Appointed by the court and considered an officer of the court, the receiver's task is to take control and cust......
  • Santibanez v. Wier McMahon & Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • February 12, 1997
    ...53 F.3d 72, 77 n. 2 (5th Cir.1995); 7 James Moore et al., Moore's Federal Practice p 66.04(2d. ed.1996)(citing Gulf Refining Co. v. Vincent Oil Co., 185 F. 87 (5th Cir.1911)). 2. Thompson argues that the contempt order is invalid because the District Court lost jurisdiction over enforcement......
  • F.T.C. v. World Wide Factors, Ltd.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • August 10, 1989
    ...a "receiver" for certain purposes. See Securities Exch. Comm'n v. Hardy, 803 F.2d 1034 (9th Cir.1986). In Gulf Refining Co. v. Vincent Oil Co., 185 F. 87, 89-90 (5th Cir.1911), a receiver was defined as one who "take[s] possession of and preserves, pendente lite, and for the benefit of the ......
  • Martin v. Partridge
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • March 30, 1933
    ...situation here is, in principle, quite parallel to that covered by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Gulf Refining Co. v. Vincent Oil Co., 185 F. 87), where an official who possessed but the powers of a master under his appointment was designated an "additional receiver," ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT