Phillips Petroleum Company v. Polycarp L. Broussard
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY Et Al., Appellants, v. Polycarp L. BROUSSARD, Appellee
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
Appellee Broussard, as plaintiff below, brought this action in a state court for the cancellation of an oil, gas and mineral lease as to part of the land covered thereby (29.526 acres). Appellants, Phillips Petroleum Company and others, defendants below, removed the case to the United States District Court which granted appellee’s motion for a judgment on the pleadings. Appellants attack this judgment on four grounds, which are the identical grounds upon which they relied in the lower court.
The judge in the trial below, reciting that “both sides candidly concede that there is no factual dispute,” wrote a careful and exhaustive opinion 1
dealing with each of the legal propositions relied upon on this appeal. A reading of the record and briefs convinces us that the case was fully presented by the pleadings, that the language of the crucial “Pugh Clause” ( 160 F.Supp. 907 ) is clear and unambiguous, that the case was correctly decided and that the opinion of the trial judge accurately and adequately deals with all of the points relied upon here. For the reasons and upon the considerations set out in said opinion (and cf. Mattison v. Trotti, 5 Cir., 1959, 262 F.2d 339 ) the judgment is Affirmed.
1
. Broussard v. Phillips Petroleum Co., D.C.1958, 160 F.Supp. 905 .
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.