Skip to main content

Pich v. Lankford

Citations

  • 302 S.W.2d 645
  • 157 Tex. 335
  • 7 Oil & Gas Rep. 628
  • 1957 Tex. LEXIS 593

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing default rule that a reserved royalty interest “would be carved proportionately from the two mineral ownerships”
  • determining the former types of cases were not controlling when a grantor fails to convey part of the estate he owns through an exception
  • the words A exception @ and A reservation @ are not strictly synonymous but are often used interchangeably
  • “The words ‘exception’ and ‘reservation’ are not strictly synonymous . . ., but they are often used interchangeably.”
  • the words \exception\ and \reservation\ are not strictly synonymous but are often used interchangeably
  • in favor of Pich, who obtained the grantor’s interest in each deed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Calvert, Garwood

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

48 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Pich v. Lankford

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced 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.