Atkins v. Page

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Atkins v. Page

1922 OK 136, 208 P. 824, 86 Okla. 308, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 189

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 25, 1922

Docket12864

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1922 OK 136 (Atkins v. Page) 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

Atkins v. Page, 1922 OK 136, 208 P. 824, 86 Okla. 308, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 189 (Okla. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

KENNAMER, J.

Sallie Atkins, plaintiff in error, prosecutes this appeal to reverse an order of the district court overruling exceptions to a supersedeas bond given by Charles Page et al., superseding the judgment rendered 'in favor of Sallie Atkins in an action in the district court of Creek county wherein Sallie Atkins was plaintiff and Charles Page et al. were defendants.

This court has, this day, ’in an opinion filed in cause No. 12769, reversed the judgment of the district court and directed that judgment be entered in favor of the defendants in the cause. Tn this situation, the questions involved in this appeal have become moot and the appeal will be dismissed. It is so ordered.

HARRISON, C. J., PITCHFORD, Y. C. J.. and JOHNSON, MILLER, and NICHOLSON, JJ., concur.

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

KENNAMER, J.

Sallie Atkins, plaintiff in error, prosecutes this appeal to reverse an order of the district court overruling exceptions to a supersedeas bond given by Charles Page et al., superseding the judgment rendered 'in favor of Sallie Atkins in an action in the district court of Creek county wherein Sallie Atkins was plaintiff and Charles Page et al. were defendants.

This court has, this day, ’in an opinion filed in cause No. 12769, reversed the judgment of the district court and directed that judgment be entered in favor of the defendants in the cause. Tn this situation, the questions involved in this appeal have become moot and the appeal will be dismissed. It is so ordered.

HARRISON, C. J., PITCHFORD, Y. C. J.. and JOHNSON, MILLER, and NICHOLSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1922 OK 136, 208 P. 824, 86 Okla. 308, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 189, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atkins-v-page-okla-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack