COURTER OIL CO. v. OKLAHOMA CITY

Annotate this Case

COURTER OIL CO. v. OKLAHOMA CITY
1934 OK 209
31 P.2d 596
167 Okla. 633
Case Number: 22275
Decided: 04/03/1934
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

COURTER OIL CO.
v.
OKLAHOMA CITY.

Syllabus

¶0 1. Municipal Corporations--Constitutional Law--Ordinance Requiring Filing of Surety Bond to Cover Damages as Condition of Right to Drill Oil Well Held not Denial of Due Process of Law.
A municipal ordinance providing that no oil and gas well shall be drilled within certain defined limits within the city until there shall be filed with the city clerk of said city a bond in the sum of $ 200,000 covering each well, executed by some bonding or indemnity company authorized to do business in the state of Oklahoma conditioned for the payment of damages on account of injuries to property, either private or public, or bodily injury, including death, received or suffered by one resulting from the drilling, operation, or maintenance of any well or any structures, etc., appurtenant thereto, is not arbitrary and unreasonable so as to constitute a denial of due process of law violative of section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States or of sections 2 and 7 of art. 2 of the state Constitution.
See Gant v. Oklahoma City, 150 Okla. 86, 6 P.2d 1065; Id., 160 Okla. 62, 15 P.2d 933; Id., 289 U.S. 99, 77 L. Ed. 1058, 53 S. Ct. 530; C. C. Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 384, 29 P.2d 952.
2. Same--Doubts Resolved in Favor of Validity of Ordinance.
"If there is room for fair debate as to whether a municipal ordinance is arbitrary or unreasonable, the court will not substitute its own judgment for that of the legislative body charged with the primary duty and responsibility of determining the question."
Headnote No. 3, Gant v. Oklahoma City, 289 U.S. 99, 77 L. Ed. 1058, 53 S. Ct. 530; C. C. Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 384, 29 P.2d 952.
3. Same--Statutes--Enactment not Invalid Because Compliance With Conditions Hard for Particular Persons.
"An otherwise valid statute or ordinance conferring a privilege is not rendered invalid because it chances that particular persons find it hard or even impossible to comply with precedent conditions upon which enjoyment of the privilege is made to depend." Gant v. Oklahoma City, 289 U.S. 99, 77 L. Ed. 1058, 53 S. Ct. 530; C. C. Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 384, 29 P.2d 952.
4. Same--Delegation of Right to City to Impose Restrictions on Drilling of Oil Wells Within City not Precluded by Prior Delegation of Authority to Corporation Commission.
"The conferring upon the Corporation Commission of the power to enact rules and regulations governing the drilling of wells for oil or gas within the state, does not deprive the state of power to delegate to cities the right to impose restrictions on the drilling of wells within the limits of the cities." C. C. Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 384, 29 P.2d 952.
5. Same--Ordinance Held Constitutional.
Record examined, and held, that the provision of the ordinance in question is a valid legislative enactment and offends no provision of the federal or state Constitutions.

Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; Tom G. Chambers, Judge.

Action by Oklahoma City against the Courter Oil Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Everest, McKenzie, Halley & Gibbens, for plaintiff in error.
A. L. McRill, Municipal Counselor, and H. T. Deupree, Asst. Mun. Counselor, for defendant in error.

MCNEILL, J.

¶1 This appeal involves the failure of the Courter Oil Company, plaintiff in error, to post a bond in the sum of $ 200,000, as required by Ordinance 3944 of the city of Oklahoma City in reference to drilling of an oil and gas well within the U-7 drilling zone of said city.

¶2 We consider it unnecessary to discuss this question. This same question has received our consideration. See Gant v. Oklahoma City, 150 Okla. 86, 6 P.2d 1065; Gant v. Oklahoma City, 160 Okla. 62, 15 P.2d 833, which was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, 289 U.S. 98, 77 L. Ed. 1058, 53 S. Ct. 530; C. C. Julian Oil & Royalties Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 384, 29 P.2d 952, and Hud Oil & Refining Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 457, 30 P.2d 169; and Morgan Petroleum Co. v. Oklahoma City, 167 Okla. 632, 31 P.2d 594.

¶3 Judgment affirmed.