A. B. Farquhar Co., Limited v. Sherman

1908 OK 169, 97 P. 565, 22 Okla. 17, 1908 Okla. LEXIS 3
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided September 10, 1908·No. No. 2120, Okla. T.·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

*18 Kane, J.

As the plaintiff in error relies solely on alleged error of the court below in giving certain instructions, and the exception saved was a general exception to all of the instructions given, and as some of the instructions given were undoubtedly correct, the exception saved is not sufficient to present to this court the error complained of. The charge of the court below consisted of 12 separate instructions, most of them being unobjectionable. It is a well-settled rule that a general exception to the entire charge will not be available, if any one of the instructions given are correct. Glaser et al. v. Glaser et al., 13 Okla. 389, 74 Pac. 944.

“A general exception to a charge of the court containing a great many distinct instructions, some of which are unobjectionable, is not available error.” (Insurance Co. v. Davis, 59 Kan. 521, 53 Pac. 856.)

The above cases seem to be decisive of the case at bar.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

A. B. Farquhar Co., Limited v. Sherman, 1908 OK 169, 97 P. 565, 22 Okla. 17, 1908 Okla. LEXIS 3 (Okla. 1908).

1908 OK 169 (A. B. Farquhar Co., Limited v. Sherman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Kinney v. Williams
1917 OK 466 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1917)
Denson v. Fowler
1916 OK 270 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1916)
Johnson v. Johnson
1914 OK 478 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Cummings v. Lobsitz
1914 OK 382 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Burgess v. Felix
1914 OK 213 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Shelby v. Shaner
1911 OK 188 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1911)