PEARCE v. ASSOCIATED OIL COMPANY (1937)

The plaintiffs sued for the purpose of impeaching as insufficient and fraudulent the accounting made by defendant to plaintiffs in respect to their royalty interest in an oil lease and to obtain a forfeiture of the lease because thereof. Judgment went for plaintiffs based upon findings that the shortages claimed were due to the use of incorrect and inaccurate methods of sampling and testing the royalty oil, and that the employment of such methods by the defendant was improper, but not fraudulent. Both parties have appealed and have raised the same questions as those in Fowler v. Associated Oil Company, Cal.Sup., 74 P.2d 727, this day decided. Additional points raised in this case need not be considered as the judgment is founded upon the errors pointed out in the latter case and for that purpose must be retried in the manner and within the same rules as there directed.

For the reasons stated in the Fowler Case, that portion of the judgment from which the plaintiffs have appealed is affirmed. The balance of the judgment is reversed.

PER CURIAM.