Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 338 SW2D 399 - Cameron v. Lebow

Cameron v. Lebow’s Empirical Analysis

1960

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently August 2016

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

70196019701980199020002010decided

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 Grubb v. McAfee · Doss Oil Royalty Co. v. Texas Company · Monarch Oil, Gas & Coal Co. v. Richardson · Eastern Kentucky Mineral & Timber Co. v. Swann-Day Lumber Co. · Warren Oil & Gas Co. v. Gilliam

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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Let us now recapitulate the implied obligations of the lessee with respect to development as set forth in the foregoing eases. Those obligations are: (1) where delay rental is provided in the lease, to commence or increase development after notice and demand; (2) where no delay rental is provided, to begin or continue operations within a reasonable time; (3) where productive operation has been commenced, to continue that operation____ There is consequently no authority for adjudging that a lessee ... has an implied obligation to begin operations on a particular part of the leasehold ... without notice and demand from the lessor to so proceed____ Under Kentucky law, as we have said, this obligation (obligation to develop) does not exist independently of notice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “( A)bandonment is the intentional relinquishment of a known right. It is not a ground of forfeiture, but the completed act of abandonment itself terminates the leasehold interest. No court action to cancel is required.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “in view of the nature and purpose of an oil and gas lease and the practical necessities for expeditious development, the fact of abandonment may be more readily found than in other legal relationships,”
    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.