Russell v. Walker

Decision Date11 October 1932
Docket Number24059.
Citation15 P.2d 114,160 Okla. 145,1932 OK 676
PartiesRUSSELL v. WALKER et al. [a1]
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Under the police power of the state, the Legislature may regulate and restrict the use and enjoyment of landowners of the natural resources of the state, such as oil and gas, so as to protect them from waste, and prevent the infringement of the rights of others. Such legislation does not infringe the constitutional inhibitions against taking of property without due process of law, denial of the equal protection of the laws, or taking property without just compensation (Const. art. 2, §§ 7, 24; Const. U.S. Amend. 14).

2. By the provisions of section 35, article 9, of the Constitution of Oklahoma, the Legislature was given the power to alter amend, revise, or repeal sections from 18 to 34, inclusive of article 9 of the Constitution, after the second Monday in January, 1909, there being but one limitation of that power which is that no amendment made under that authority shall contravene the provisions of any part of the Constitution other than the sections last above referred to, or any such amendments thereof.

3. Under the provisions of article 9 of the Constitution, the corporation commission is vested with legislative, executive and judicial power, and a legislative enactment pursuant to section 35, article 9 of the Constitution, does not contravene the provisions of any part of the Constitution other than sections 18 to 34, inclusive, of article 9 thereof, merely because it extends the field over which the constitutional authority of the corporation commission to exercise legislative, executive, and judicial powers may operate.

4. An appeal may be taken to the Supreme Court from orders of the corporation commission affecting the proration of oil and gas under the provisions of House Bill No. 168, Session Laws 1915, c. 25 (sections 7954 to 7963, inclusive, C. O. S. 1921, sections 11565 to 11574, inclusive, O. S. 931).

5. The corporation commission of Oklahoma has jurisdiction, pursuant to the provisions of House Bill No. 168, Session Laws 1915, c. 25 (sections 7954 to 7963, inclusive, C. O. S. 1921, sections 11565 to 11574, inclusive, O. S. 1931), to determine questions of fact involving the enforcement of the provisions of that legislative enactment and to impose penalties as therein provided.

6. Prohibition is an extraordinary writ and cannot be resorted to when the ordinary and usual remedies provided by law are available. It will only issue where an inferior tribunal does not have jurisdiction or assumes to exercise judicial power not granted by law, or is attempting to make an unauthorized application of judicial force.

7. In an application for a writ of prohibition to prohibit the state corporation commission from taking jurisdiction in a cause pending before it, where the complaint states facts sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the commission, it will be presumed that the commission will act within the jurisdiction conferred by law, even where the principal relief prayed for may be beyond its control.

Original application by Frank Russell, individually and as trustee for a writ of prohibition prayed to be directed to Paul Walker and others, members of and composing the Corporation Commission of the State of Oklahoma, and another.

Petition denied.

Rehearing denied; RILEY, J., dissenting. CLARK, V. C.J., and HEFNER, J., absent.

Sid White, of Oklahoma City, for petitioner.

Hayes, Richardson, Shartel, Gilliland & Jordan and E. S. Ratliff, all of Oklahoma City, for respondents.

ANDREWS J.

This cause is before this court on a petition and relation for prohibition filed by the petitioners, Frank Russell, individually, and Frank Russell, as trustee, and an answer or response thereto filed by the respondents Paul Walker, Roy Hughes, and C. C. Childers, members of and composing the corporation commission of the state of Oklahoma, and E. G. Dahlgren, a complainant before the corporation commission.

In the petition and relation it is alleged that the petitioners have special interests and property rights in and to two certain described tracts of land, upon each of which there is a producing oil and gas well; that the respondent E. G. Dahlgren had filed with the corporation commission his complaint in writing charging that the corporation commission had made and promulgated certain orders regulating and limiting the production and taking of oil from the Oklahoma City oil field and that the petitioners had violated said orders and overproduced said wells; and praying that said corporation commission hear said complaint and penalize the petitioners by closing said wells; that the corporation commission had assumed and usurped and was assuming and usurping power, jurisdiction, and authority to try said complaint and to grant said prayer; and praying a writ prohibiting the corporation commission from assuming or usurping this, a jurisdiction not granted it by law.

The response in effect was a general denial.

The respondents contend that their actions were and are authorized by the provisions of article 9 of the Constitution and the provisions of House Bill No. 168 of the Fifth Legislature (Laws 1915, c. 25), sections 7954 to 7963, inclusive, C. O. S. 1921, sections 11565 to 11574, inclusive, O. S. 1931.

The petitioners contend that the corporation commission does not have legislative, executive, and judicial power over oil and gas wells and the production of oil and gas therefrom; that the Legislature is without authority to vest the corporation commission with such powers; and that the Legislature has not attempted to vest the corporation commission with such powers.

The provisions of House Bill No. 168, supra, are as follows:

"Section 1. That the production of crude oil or petroleum in the State of Oklahoma, in such manner and under such conditions as to constitute waste, is hereby prohibited.

Section 2. That the taking of crude oil or petroleum from any oil-bearing sand or sands in the State of Oklahoma at a time when there is not a market demand therefor at the well at a price equivalent to the actual value of such crude oil or petroleum is hereby prohibited, and the actual value of such crude oil or petroleum at any time shall be the average value as near as may be ascertained in the United States at retail of the by-products of such crude oil or petroleum when refined less the cost and a reasonable profit in the business of transporting, refining and marketing the same, and the Corporation Commission of this state is hereby invested (vested?) with the authority and power to investigate and determine from time to time the actual value of such crude oil or petroleum by the standard herein provided, and when so determined said Commission shall promulgate its findings by its orders duly made and recorded, and publish the same in some newspaper of general circulation in the State.

Section 3. That the term 'waste' as used herein, in addition to its ordinary meaning, shall include economic waste, underground waste, surface waste, and waste incident to the production of crude oil or petroleum in excess of transportation or marketing facilities or reasonable market demands. The Corporation Commission shall have authority to make rules and regulations for the prevention of such wastes, and for the protection of all fresh water strata, and oil and gas bearing strata, encountered in any well drilled for oil.

Section 4. That whenever the full production from any common source of supply of crude oil or petroleum in this State can only be obtained under conditions constituting waste, as herein defined, then any person, firm or corporation, having the right to drill into and produce oil from any such common source of supply, may take therefrom only such proportion of all crude oil and petroleum that may be produced therefrom, without waste, as the production of the well of wells of any such person, firm or corporation, bears to the total production of such common source of supply. The Corporation Commission is authorized to so regulate the taking of crude oil or petroleum from any or all such common sources of supply, within the State of Oklahoma, as to prevent the inequitable or unfair taking, from a common source of supply, of such crude oil or petroleum, by any person, firm, or corporation, and to prevent unreasonable discrimination in favor of any one such common source of supply as against another.

Section 5. That for the purpose of determining such production, a gauge of each well shall be taken under rules and regulations to be prescribed by the Corporation Commission, and said Commission is authorized and directed to make and promulgate, by proper order, such other rules and regulations, and to employ or appoint such agents with the consent of the Governor, as may be necessary to enforce this act.

Section 6. That any person, firm, or corporation, or the Attorney General on behalf of the State, may institute proceedings before the Corporation Commission, or apply for a hearing before said Commission, upon any question relating to the enforcement of this act, and jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon said Commission to hear and determine the same. Said Commission shall set a time and place, when and where such hearing shall be had and give reasonable notice thereof to all persons or classes interested therein, by publication in some newspaper or newspapers, having general circulation in the State, and in addition thereto, shall cause reasonable notice in writing to be served personally on any person, firm or corporation complained against. In the exercise and enforcement of such jurisdiction, said Commission is authorized to determine any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 cases
  • York v. Bank of Commerce & Trust Co.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Court of Appeals
    • March 29, 1935
    ... ... the legal right is doubtful, or where the usual remedies ... provided by law ... [93 S.W.2d 341] ... are available. Russell v. Walker, 160 Okl. 145, 15 ... P.2d 114; Russell Petroleum Co. v. Walker, 160 Okl ... 156, 15 P.2d 125; Hall v. Welch, 151 Okl. 206, 3 ... ...

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