Stanolind Oil & Gas Co. v. State, Motion No. 12824.

• Decision Date: 14 April 1937
• Docket Number: Motion No. 12824.,No. 7174.,7174.
• Parties: STANOLIND OIL & GAS CO. et al. v. STATE.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 1

104 S.W.2d 1

STANOLIND OIL & GAS CO. et al. v. STATE.

Motion No. 12824.

No. 7174.

Supreme Court of Texas.

April 14, 1937.

Error to Court of Civil Appeals of Eighth Supreme Judicial District.

On motion for rehearing.

Motion overruled.

For original opinion, see 101 S.W.(2d) 801.

Turner, Rodgers & Winn, of Dallas, and Clay Tallman and Donald Campbell, both of Tulsa, Okl., for plaintiff in error Stanolind Oil & Gas Co.

Robert T. Neill, of San Angelo, for plaintiffs in error J. A. Chapman et al.

J. B. Dibrell, Jr., of Coleman, and John Sayles and Jack Sayles, both of Abilene, for plaintiff in error Permian Oil Co.

R. E. Seagler and Lee M. Sharrar, both of Houston, for plaintiff in error Humble Oil & Refining Co.

Thompson, Mitchell, Thompson & Young and Truman Post Young, all of St. Louis, Mo., for plaintiff in error Shell Petroleum Corporation.

George T. Wilson, of San Angelo, for plaintiff in error Yates.

R. C. Gwilliam, of Tulsa, Okl., for plaintiff in error Marathon Oil Co.

Phillips, Trammell, Chizum, Estes & Edwards, of Fort Worth, for plaintiff in error Empire Gas & Fuel Co.

John Perkins, of Midland, for plaintiff in error Humble, etc.

Vinson, Elkins, Sweeton & Weems and C. E. Bryson, all of Houston, and R. W. Adams, Jr., of Fort Worth, for plaintiff in error Pure Oil Co.

Walter L. Kimmel, of Tulsa, Okl., for plaintiff in error Hargrove Hudson.

Hiner & Pannill, of Fort Worth, for plaintiffs in error Peerless Oil Co. et al.

Smith & Smith, of Fort Worth, for plaintiff in error Southland Royalty Co.

W. A. Keeling, of Austin, Francis H. DeGroat, of Duluth, Minn., Charles A. Holden, of Tulsa, Okl., John M. Davenport, and Gibbs & Williams, all of San Angelo, for plaintiff in error Douglas Oil Co.

Thompson, Knight, Baker & Harris, of Dallas, for plaintiff in error Sims Oil Co.

D. B. Hardeman, of San Angelo, for plaintiff in error Cornell.

William McCraw, Atty. Gen., and H. Grady Chandler and Russell Rentfro, Asst. Attys. Gen., Hart Johnson, of Fort Stockton, Mark McMahon, Warren Scarborough, and Cantey, Hanger & McMahon, all of Fort Worth, and C. W. Trueheart, R. L. Ball, and Ball, Seeligson & Trueheart, all of San Antonio, for the State.

Wagstaff, Harwell, Wagstaff & Douthit, of Abilene, as amici curiæ.

HICKMAN, Commissioner.

In our original opinion this language appears: "In its petition the State alleged that the southeast corner of survey 70 is located at the car spring corner. Its case rests upon the fact that it is an established original corner. Upon the trial some evidence was offered tending to place its location a few varas distant from the car spring, whereupon the State filed a trial amendment adopting that point in the alternative, as the true location."

The State is not entitled to so liberal an interpretation of its trial amendment. That pleading is expressed in this language: "In the alternative that if it be held that the southeast corner of Survey 70, Block 1, I. & G. N. R. R. Co. be located on the ground at a point about 12 varas west from the...