Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 478 P2D 886 - Jolly v. Wilson

Jolly v. Wilson’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
February 1987
most recently cited

5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Swearingen v. Oldham · Elliott v. Berry · Armstrong v. McCracken · Pease v. Dolezal · Lanford v. Cornett

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

  1. “(1) If the interest conveyed or retained is of the oil and gas in and under the land, a mineral interest is indicated. On the other hand, if the interest conveyed is in oil and gas to be produced, a royalty interest may be the result. (Emphasis added.) (2) Who has the right to grant leases and to receive bonuses and rentals? If it is the grantee of the interest, a mineral interest is created. If not a royalty or nonparticipating mineral interest may be the result. (3) If the right of ingress and egress and of exploration is granted, the interest conveyed is mineral not royalty.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If there is an oil and gas lease in existence at the time the deed is made, the word `royalty' when used to describe the interest conveyed, is usually interpreted to mean royalty in the RESTRICTED sense as a share in production only; but, IN THE ABSENCE OF AN EXISTING LEASE, `ROYALTY' IS LIKELY TO BE INTERPRETED IN ITS LOOSE, BROAD SENSE TO MEAN A MINERAL INTEREST.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “one-half of one-eighth of all MINERALS in and under the land, the same being reserved and excepted, and said ROYALTY is nonparticipating in the lease or lease rentals.”
    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.