Court Opinion

ID: 9834312
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:28:36.476333+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:13.704160
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
.Appellees in their motion for rehearing contend that we erred in our original opinion in rendering a joint and several judgment against them for the delay rentals on the land in question.
Their position is well taken. It appears from the agreed facts that all delay rentals to the time of trial were paid by the respective lessees to those claiming the same by virtue of the mineral deed from the White Land & Cattle Company to H. E. Lemar.
We find from an examination of the record that the White Land & Cattle Company by said deed conveyed to Lemar all its interest in the rentals on said land; that he in turn conveyed all the delayed rentals on the west one-half of section 112, block 11, to the Magnolia Petroleum Company, and one-eighth of the delay rentals on section 122, block 11, to A. C. Butler.
By virtue of the agreement then, it appears that the rentals which have become due since appellant became the owner of the surface have been paid to Lemar, Butler, and the Magnolia Petroleum Company.
The judgment in this case should be that appellant recover of and from Magnolia Petroleum Company the sum of 10 cents per acre on 113.10 acres, the number of acres in the west one-half of section 112, block 11, or $11.31, from Butler the sum of $8, being one-eighth of the rental paid on section 122, block 11, and from Lemar $56, or the remaining seven-eighths of the rental paid thereon. ’
The judgment heretofore rendered is amended, and judgment is now rendered that appellant recover of and from Magnolia Petroleum Company the sum of $11.31, from A. C. Butler the sum of $8, and from H. E. Lemar the sum of $56.
The motion for rehearing is in other respects overruled.