Adams v. Ogden

1935 OK 56, 40 P.2d 677, 170 Okla. 429, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 712
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedJanuary 29, 1935
Docket25606
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1935 OK 56 (Adams v. Ogden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Adams v. Ogden, 1935 OK 56, 40 P.2d 677, 170 Okla. 429, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 712 (Okla. 1935).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The original petition was filed herein May 29, 1934, seeking direction to the Honorable John B. Ogden, judge of the district court of Carter county, in certain respects concerning an action filed in that court. On the 20th day of September, 1934, the following motion to dismiss was filed;

“Now comes the respondent and represents to the court that the questions presented by the petition and the response of this respondent have become moot, in this :
“That the petition is for writ of prohibition which grows out of two actions in replevin in the district court of Carter county, Okla., wherein Adams attempted to take possession of certain property described in the mortgage executed by Anna Solomon, and which property instead of being delivered up to Adams was ordered to be taken charge of by a receiver.
“This respondent alleges and states that since the filing of the petition herein and the response thereto, the property described in each of said suits in the district court has been taken over by Joe Brown, trustee in bankruptcy, after Anna Solomon had been adjudicated a bankrupt.
“That the property so taken charge of by the trustees has been sold under an order of the bankruptcy court.
“That by reason of the proceedings in bankruptcy, all the questions involved in this proceeding and in the two replevin actions in Carter county, Okla., have become moot.
“Wherefore, the respondent prays that this motion be sustained, and that this cause be dismissed.”

There has been no contest or response filed to this motion to dismiss, and it being upon the certification of the district judge and by counsel so alleged, this court will, in the absence of a contest, take the facts as true and dismiss the proceedings.

It is therefore the order of the court that the proceedings be dismissed.

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

Related

Shepherd v. Herndon
1965 OK 6 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1935 OK 56, 40 P.2d 677, 170 Okla. 429, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adams-v-ogden-okla-1935.