Case Name: NATALIE OIL CO. et al. v. LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO. In re LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO.
Court: Louisiana Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Louisiana
Decision Date: 1915-05-07
Citations: 137 La. 705
Docket Number: No. 21306
Parties: NATALIE OIL CO. et al. v. LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO. In re LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Louisiana Reports
Volume: 137
Pages: 705–713

Head Matter:
(69 South. 146.)
No. 21306.
NATALIE OIL CO. et al. v. LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO. In re LOUISIANA RY. & NAV. CO.
(May 7, 1915.
On the Merits, May 10, 1915.
Rehearing Denied June 28, 1915.)
(Syllabiis by the Court.)
Injunction <&wkey;178 — Dissolution—Bond.
Where an alleged owner of land sues out an injunction and prevents a railway company from boring oil wells on the right of way own ed by the defendant company, on the allegations that the railway company has only a right of way, and not a fee in the land, and that such boring is a trespass and a disturbance of the oil under the land of plaintiff adjacent to the right of way, and that he will be injured by such action, the writ of injunction so issued may be dissolved on bond, in the discretion of the district court, and the bond must be for all damages sustained by the plaintiff, should a definitive judgment be rendered against defendant in the suit.
[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Injunction, Cent. Dig. § 390; Dec. Dig. <@=^>178.]
Action by the Natalie Oil Company and others against the Louisiana Railway & Navigation Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant applies for writs of certiorari and prohibition.
Writ of mandamus granted.
See, also, 68 South. 737, ante, p. 392.
Wise, Randolph, Rendall & Freyer, of Shreveport, for relator. D. Edward Greer, of Beaumont, and Thigpen & I-Ierold. of Shreveport (F. C. Proctor, of Beaumont, of counsel), for respondents.

Opinion:
Striking Papers from Files.
SOMMERVILLE, J.
Counsel for the Natalie Oil Company et al., having brought to the attention of the court that relators have attached to the argument made on their behalf, in applying to this court for a writ of prohibition or mandamus to the trial judge, a certain document which was not a part of the record of this cause in the district court, said document being signed by J. W. Marston, and which is considered to bear upon the issue presented for consideration and decision, and the court being of opinion that it can neither consider the same nor require the respondent judge to do so;
And it further appearing that counsel for the plaintiff the Natalie Oil Company have attached to their motion a counter affidavit of J. W. Marston and other documents, which form no part of the record of the district court; and, again, that counsel for relator have filed other documents in answer to those filed by counsel for plaintiff:
It is ordered that the documents signed by J. W. Marston, of dates April 17 and 24,1915, and all other documents filed by plaintiff and defendant in this court which were not filed in this cause in the first judicial district court of Louisiana, in and for the parish of Caddo, be withdrawn from the files of the court.