Bolton v. Coats

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that only “extrinsic fraud,” as distinguished from “intrinsic fraud,” is sufficient to authorize a collateral attack so as to prevent the defendant lessees, under whom plaintiff held an overriding royalty, from relying on a Railroad Commission order
• Railroad Commission's order classifying well as \gas\ well for regulatory purposes no bar to plaintiff's proof that well was in fact an \oil\ well for purposes of common-law action for breach of contract

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).