Blocher v. Reynolds

1935 OK 420, 43 P.2d 405, 171 Okla. 527, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 33
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedApril 16, 1935
DocketNo. 25426.
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 1935 OK 420 (Blocher v. Reynolds) 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
Blocher v. Reynolds, 1935 OK 420, 43 P.2d 405, 171 Okla. 527, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 33 (Okla. 1935).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

M. E. Reynolds sued F. P. Johnson, Ada L. Blocher and W. N. Goble to quiet title to lots 35 and 36 of block 22 in Walnut Grove addition to Oklahoma City.

Reynolds claimed title through a tax resale deed recorded January 26, 1920, and a quitclaim deed from Jesse R. Ball, the record owner of the land at the time of the *528 tax resale, which was recorded September 24, 1929.

The defendants Bloeher and Goble claimed through a quitclaim deed from Jesse Ball dated February 25, 1925, recorded March 31, 1930.

There is substantial evidence that when Reynolds took the quitclaim from Ball in 1929, he did not know that Ball had given a quitclaim in 1925, under which Bloeher claims. Reynolds’ quitclaim was recorded before that to Bloeher. There is evidence that when Reynolds received the deed from Ball, he partially fenced the land.

As the trial judge found generally for the plaintiff, and there is substantial evidence to support his findings, the judgment of the trial court in favor of the plaintiff: Reynolds will be affirmed.

The Supreme Court acknowledges the aid of Attorneys Philip Kates, C. H. Jameson, and Marvin C. Johnson in the preparation of this opinion. These attorneys constituted an advisory committee selected by the State Bar, appointed 'by the Judicial Council, and approved by the Supreme Court. After the analysis of law and facts was prepared by Mr. Kates and approved by Mr. Jameson and Mr. Johnson, the cause was assigned to a Justice of this court for examination and report to the court. Thereafter, upon consideration by a majority of the court, this opinion was adopted.

McNEILL, C. J., and RILEY, BUSBY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Galeener v. Reynolds
1937 OK 368 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1935 OK 420, 43 P.2d 405, 171 Okla. 527, 1935 Okla. LEXIS 33, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blocher-v-reynolds-okla-1935.