Mize v. Exxon Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
640 F.2d 637 · 1981
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently November 2011
7 federal appellate · 7 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 Green v. United States · Clifton v. Koontz · Sauder v. Mid-Continent Petroleum Corp. · Southland Royalty Co. v. Humble Oil & Refining Co. · Whitaker v. Texaco Inc.
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“". . . Presumptively, the very purpose of unitization, whether voluntary or enforced, is to determine and place within a productive unit the area to be drained. The exclusion of land from within a unit is, necessarily, a determination that it will not be drained by a well or wells on the adjacent properties."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A plethora of cases have firmly established the doctrine that operations conducted on any part of unitized acreage, even though not on the land under the lease in question, fulfill the indivisible obligation of the lessee and hold the entire lease beyond the primary term. This result has been affirmed whether the leased tract lies entirely within the unit, Whitaker v. Texaco, Inc., 288 F.2d 169 (10th Cir.1960); Boutte v. Chevron Oil Company, 316 F.Supp. 524 (E.D.La.1970), aff’d, 442 F.2d 1337 (5th Cir.1971); Harper v. Hudson Gas & Oil Corporation, 189 F.Supp. 781 (W.D.La.1960), aff’d, 299 F.2d 238 (5th Cir.1962); Clifton v. Koontz, 160 Tex. 82 , 325 S.W.2d 684 (1959), or only partially within the unit, Scott v. Pure Oil Co., 194 F.2d 393 (5th Cir.1952); Broussard v. Amerada Petroleum Corporation, 350 F.Supp. 104 (W.D. La.1972); Gray v. Cameron, 218 Ark. 142 , 234 S.W.2d 769 (1950); Somers v. Harris Trust & Savings Bank, 1 Kan.App. 397 , 566 P.2d 775 (1977). (Emphasis supplied.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“... Any operations conducted on any part of ... unitized land shall be considered ... operations conducted under this lease.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.