Bowden v. Phillips Petroleum Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “Hankins did involve similar allegations that the lessee’s intra-affiliate sales transactions were a sham”
• explaining that only actions that are arbitrary, unreasonable, or without reference to any guiding principles constitute abuses of discretion
• describing, in class action certification appeal, similar distinction between wellhead prices and those received from downstream sales after processing
• observing that “sophisticated parties in today’s market might enter a contract that distinguishes the forms and components of natural gas” but the gas royalty agreements at issue “were entered long before extraction and sale of natural gas liquids was commonplace”
• describing, in class action certification appeal, similar distinction between wellhead prices and those received from downstream sales after processing
• describing, in class action certification appeal, similar distinction between wellhead prices and those received from downstream sales after processing

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).