· 8/18/2009
Cambridge Production, Inc. v. Geodyne Nominee Corp.
Citations
- 292 S.W.3d 725
- 2009 WL 1813143
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding quasi-estoppel precluded contracting party from exercising its contractual rights
- holding quasi-estoppel precluded contracting party from exercising its contractual rights
- mineral interest owners could not repudiate a unit designation after accepting royalties attributable to that unit
- mineral interest owners could not accept royalties they received only because of unit operations and then contend that the unit designation was invalid
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Hancock, Pirtle, Boyd
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.