From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Boyce v. Dundee Healdton Sand Unit
Court of Appeals of Oklahoma
560 P.2d 234 (1975)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Mary Boyce and others (plaintiffs) owned producing oil wells on tracts of land adjacent to the Dundee Healdton Sand Unit (Unit) (defendant). The Unit was established by an order of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (Commission). The Commission’s order authorized the operator of the Unit, Atlantic Richfield Company (ARCO) (defendant), to inject water into the land in order to stimulate oil production. Shortly after ARCO conducted the waterflooding operations, the plaintiffs’ wells began producing water instead of oil, and the wells became damaged. The plaintiffs brought suit against the Unit and ARCO for nuisance. The trial court found in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendants appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Romang, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
