Chapman v. Langley

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Chapman v. Langley

1933 OK 375, 23 P.2d 148, 164 Okla. 130, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 782

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 13, 1933

Docket20737

StatusPublished

This text of 1933 OK 375 (Chapman v. Langley) 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

Chapman v. Langley, 1933 OK 375, 23 P.2d 148, 164 Okla. 130, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 782 (Okla. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

WELCH, J.

This action was commenced in the district court of Marshall county, Okla., by defendant in error, L. M. Langley, against the plaintiff in error, Fred A. Chapman, and others, for foreclosure of tax sales certificates under chapter 12 of Session Laws of 1925. Upon the trial of the cause, judgment was rendered in the trial court in favor of defendant in error herein, and against Fred A. Chapman, plaintiff in error here, who was one of the defendants below. From the judgment so rendered, plaintiff in error has appealed.

The cause is controlled by the holding of this court in the case of Casner et al. v. Meriwether, 152 Okla. 246, 4 P. (2d) 19, wherein this court held chapter 12, Session Laws 1925, unconstitutional and void. To the same effect is Leekley v. Olsen, 159 Okla. 109, 14 P. (2d) 382.

The judgment is therefore vacated, set aside, and held for naught, and the cause is remanded to the trial court, with directions to dismiss the cause.

*131 RILEY, C. J., CULLISON, Y. C. J., and S WIND ALL, ANDREWS, MeNEILL, BAX-LESS, and BUSBY, JJ., concur. OSBORN. J., absent.

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

WELCH, J.

This action was commenced in the district court of Marshall county, Okla., by defendant in error, L. M. Langley, against the plaintiff in error, Fred A. Chapman, and others, for foreclosure of tax sales certificates under chapter 12 of Session Laws of 1925. Upon the trial of the cause, judgment was rendered in the trial court in favor of defendant in error herein, and against Fred A. Chapman, plaintiff in error here, who was one of the defendants below. From the judgment so rendered, plaintiff in error has appealed.

The cause is controlled by the holding of this court in the case of Casner et al. v. Meriwether, 152 Okla. 246, 4 P. (2d) 19, wherein this court held chapter 12, Session Laws 1925, unconstitutional and void. To the same effect is Leekley v. Olsen, 159 Okla. 109, 14 P. (2d) 382.

The judgment is therefore vacated, set aside, and held for naught, and the cause is remanded to the trial court, with directions to dismiss the cause.

*131 RILEY, C. J., CULLISON, Y. C. J., and S WIND ALL, ANDREWS, MeNEILL, BAX-LESS, and BUSBY, JJ., concur. OSBORN. J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1933 OK 375, 23 P.2d 148, 164 Okla. 130, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 782, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chapman-v-langley-okla-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack