Ayers v. Amatucci

1949 OK 116, 207 P.2d 788, 201 Okla. 598, 1949 Okla. LEXIS 355
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 31, 1949
DocketNo. 33596
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 1949 OK 116 (Ayers v. Amatucci) 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
Ayers v. Amatucci, 1949 OK 116, 207 P.2d 788, 201 Okla. 598, 1949 Okla. LEXIS 355 (Okla. 1949).

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

This was an action brought by the plaintiff in error, plaintiff below, against the defendants in error, defendants below, for damages for personal injuries.

Defendants demurred to plaintiff’s petition and the same was overruled by the court, and thereafter issues Were joined, and the case came on for trial.

After a jury had been empaneled, counsel for the plaintiff stated his case to the jury, the facts he expected to prove and adopted all of the allegations of plaintiff’s petition as a part of his opening statement, at the close of which defendants moved the court for judgment upon the pleadings and opening statement of counsel, which motion was sustained. The petition stated a good cause of action.

In McLaughlin v. Lagers et al., 99 Okla. 155, 225 P. 920, this court held:

“After the pleadings are made up and issues joined .... if the petition is good against a demurrer, it is good against a motion for judgment in favor of defendant upon opening statement of counsel, unless it appears that such statement contravenes the material allegations of the petition, whether by conceding errors in the petition or failure of the proof to sustain the petition.”

We do not think the opening statement in this case was in contravention of the petition, and for that reason the trial court erred in sustaining the motion of the defendant for judgment on the pleadings and the opening statement of plaintiff’s counsel.

For the reason stated, the judgment of the trial court is reversed, and the cause remanded.'

DAVISON, C.J., and GIBSON, LUT-TRELL, HALLEY, and O’NEAL, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Utley v. Standard Magnesium & Chemical Company
478 P.2d 953 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1970)
Harrell v. Horton
1965 OK 61 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1965)
Novak v. Kansas City Transit, Inc.
365 S.W.2d 539 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1963)
Ayers v. Amatucci
1952 OK 124 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1949 OK 116, 207 P.2d 788, 201 Okla. 598, 1949 Okla. LEXIS 355, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ayers-v-amatucci-okla-1949.