Vogel v. Cobb’s Empirical Analysis
1943
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably American Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. All American Bus Lines, Inc. (1949), 162 W. Va. 86 - Cochran v. Appalachian Power Co. (1978)
5 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Kansas City, M. & O. Ry. Co. v. Shutt · Cherry v. Brown · Stewart v. Balderston · Hunter v. Hughes · Ball v. Fleshman
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Under the rule of ejusdem generis, where a party or author in a contract or conveyance makes use first of terms each evidently confined and limited to a particular class or species of things, and then, after such specific enumeration, subjoins a term of very extensive signification, this term, however general and comprehensive in its possible import, yet, when thus used, embraces things only ejusdem generis, i. e., of the same kind or species, with those comprehended by the preceding limited and confined terms.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“'water produced on said land for its operation thereon.' " Id . at 279. It said the clause did not give the lessee the right to use water from the land to supply houses located on other lands, even though the occupants of the houses were the lessee's employees. Id . Vogel is an Oklahoma case; we are concerned with New Mexico law. The New Mexico Supreme Court has interpreted similar language differently. The use of water from the leased premises to supply employee housing would, remotely, be a use in furtherance of the lease operations. But saying so strains credulity beyond elastic limits and is therefore unlike the use of gas in this case. Energen was entitled to summary judgment on the Anderson and Pritchett Trusts' fuel gas claim. B. N-R Trust The N-R Trust's overriding royalty agreement requires Energen to pay "at the prevailing field market price therefor at the time when produced a royalty in cash or oil amounting to seven and one half (7 ½) percentum of all oil and gas produced from the lands embraced in said primary lease ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““A clause in an oil and gas lease providing that lessee is'entitled to the free use of ‘water produced on said land for its operation thereon’ does not give the lessee the right to use water therefrom to supply lease houses located on other lands, even though the occupants thereof, as part of their duties, operate the lease in question. * * * • “Under the rule of ejusdem generis, subterranean water is not conveyed by a grant of the ‘oil, petroleum, gas, coal, asphalt and all other minerals of every kind or character in and under and that may be produced from’ said real property, or a grant of the ‘oil, gas, and other minerals in and under and that may be produced from’ the land.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.