Hill v. Heritage Resources, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that whether party breached contract was purely factual dispute and declaratory judgment was not proper
• holding that the automatic stay of section 362(a)(1) does not apply to a bankrupt debtor who filed suit alleging multiple tort and breach of contract claims
• noting that the classic proximate cause test applies to tor-tious interference cases
• remanding for new trial on attorney’s fees, but not conducting a factual sufficiency review, when plaintiff failed to segregate fees relating to successful declaratory judgment action from other unsuccessful claims
• operating agreements are for the exploration and development of designated oil and gas within a prescribed geographical area, with one party being appointed as an “operator” who is responsible for the management and control of drilling, development, and production activities
• A contract that is modified by mutual consent constitutes a new agreement and takes the place of the original

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).