Document: 343 U.S. 390 72 S.Ct. 842 96 L.Ed. 1022 PALMER OIL CORP. et al.v.AMERADA PETROLEUM al. FARWELL v. AMERADA Nos. 301, 302. Argued April 25, 1952. Decided May 12, Mr. Mark H. Adams, Wichita, Kan., for Palmer Oil Corp. and others. Reford Bond, Jr., Chickasha, Okl., Farwell R. M. Williams, Oklahoma City, Amerada Petroleum PER CURIAM. 1 These two appeals challenge the constitutionality of Okla.Stat. 1941 (Cum.Supp.1949) Tit. 52, §§ 286.1—286.17, providing unitized management common sources supply oil gas in Oklahoma. This statute was repealed by Legislature on 26, 1951, Okl.Laws c. 3a, § 16, p. 142, we ordered causes continued order to determine effect this repeal matters raised these appeals. 342 35, 11. After being advised Supreme Court that had no causes, noted probable jurisdiction heard argument. 2 Appellants contend an issued thereunder Corporation Commission impair their contractual rights violation U.S.Const., Art. 1, 10, amount a denial Due Process Equal Protection Clauses Fourteenth Amendment. Specifically, appellants argue is unreasonable exercise State's police power delegation legislative judicial private groups. In addition, maintain too vague indefinite furnish with any reasonable guide issuance orders approving unitization plans, evidence does not support Commission's findings fact. 3 light our previous decisions, have failed raise substantial federal questions are therefore dismissed. Cities Service Gas Co. Peerless & Co., 1950, 340 179, 71 215, 95 190; Railroad Texas Rowan Nichols 1941, 311 570, 61 343, 85 358; 310 573, 60 1021, 84 1368, as amended, 1940, 614, 615, 66, 390; Patterson Stanolind 1939, 305 376, 59 259, 83 321; Home Building Loan Association Blaisdell, 1934, 290 398, 435, 436, 437, 54 231, 239, 240, 78 413; Champlin Refining Commission, 1932, 286 210, 52 559, 76 1062. 4 Dismissed.

Category: 8