Joyce v. Wyant’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Delay-rental provisions are ordinarily part of a ‘drilling clause’ that specifies a time, usually much shorter than the so-called ‘primary term’ of the lease, in which a well is to be commenced or completed in the event that delay rentals, if authorized by the lease, are not paid. * * “There is a considerable difference in the verbiage by which a delay privilege is granted. The usual ‘or’ lease requires the lessee, under penalty of a forfeiture, to commence or complete a well at the appointed time or pay the stipulated amount periodically during the term of deferment. The ordinary ‘unless’ lease provides that a default therein shall terminate the lessee’s rights unless on or before the day set there shall be paid the agreed commutation for the period specified, with the payments for like successive periods. “Although deferment of exploratory operations is authorized by both the ‘or’ and the ‘unless’ provisions, there is a vast distinction between them in respect to the rights and liabilities of the parties. Under an ‘or’ lease — one obligating the lessee to drill a well within a certain time ‘or’ pay delay rentals — the lessee is bound either to drill or to pay delay rentals, and on the lessee’s failure to take advantage of any surrender clause that may be included in the lease, he must elect which course he will follow. If the lessee under an ‘or’ lease does not commence or complete his operations at the appointed time, he becomes liable for the rentals. On a default in the”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re P.I.N.E., Inc.

2. ““Lessor in corisideration of Lessee’s obligation to drill four wells on the premises herein leased as hereinafter set forth, of the royalties hereinafter provided, and of the agreements of Lessee hereinafter coritainéd, hereby grants, leases and lets unto Lessee for the purpose of exploring, prospecting, drilling and mining for and producing oil, gas and other minerals * * *, the following described land * ’* * : “The term of this lease is 60 days .from date hereof and as long thereafter as Lessee complies with his obligations ■hereunder, and he produces oil, gas or other minerals in paying quantities from the leased premises. “The royalties to be paid by Lessee are: * , * * ’ “The actual consideration .for this lease is that Lessee hereby obligates himself to drill four wells on the leased premises at such locations as he might choose; * * * “Lessee shall begin actual drilling of a well, hereinafter referred to as ‘initial well’ on. the leased premises within 60 days from date hereof. * * * Following completion of the ‘initial well,’ whether producer or a dry hole, Lessee shall in succession drill * * * three other wells on the leased premises within 60-day intervals following the completion of the immediately preceding well drilled by Lessee hereunder. * * "Lessee shall have the right at any time during or after the expiration of this lease to remove all property and fixtures placed by Lessee on said land, including the right to draw and remove casing. * * * “In case of can”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Joyce v. Wyant

3. ““There was no provision in the present lease that if the lessee failed to drill, he would be liable for money damages. It provided in effect that unless the lessee or his assigns drilled the wells within the specified times, the lease term would end, and no notice of termination was necessary. The lease was not forfeited, but by its own provisions its term ended and it automatically terminated when the defendants failed to comply with their obligations thereunder. Upon the termination of the lease the land reverted to the plaintiff, freed from the lessee’s estate therein, and the lessee or his assigns had no right thereafter to begin or continue drilling operations. On the other hand, when the lease terminated, the plaintiff as lessor could not compel further performance by the defendants, and in the absence of any provision to that effect could not maintain an action against the defendants for money damages for their breach in failing to drill the remaining wells.” Id. at 466, citing Joyce v. Wyant, 105 F.Supp. 979, 986 (W.D.Mich.1952), aff’d 202 F.2d 863 (6th Cir.1953)”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Reef Petroleum Corp.