Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Krumm

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Krumm

1953 OK 55, 254 P.2d 342, 208 Okla. 145, 1953 Okla. LEXIS 733

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 24, 1953

DocketNo. 34590

StatusPublished

This text of 1953 OK 55 (Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Krumm) 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

Chicago, R. I. & P. R. v. Krumm, 1953 OK 55, 254 P.2d 342, 208 Okla. 145, 1953 Okla. LEXIS 733 (Okla. 1953).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

This case was consolidated for trial in the District Court of Canadian County with the case of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company v. Hale, No. 34,589, Okl.Sup., 254 P.2d 338, and the points involved in this appeal are identical with the points raised in Case No. 34,589, the only difference being that the defendant in error in this appeal was the owner of the land on which the alfalfa was grown. In case No. 34,589 Leonard E. Hale, defendant in error, was the lessee under an agricultural lease of the same land. The opinion promulgated in the latter case is applicable to this appeal, and the opinion in that case is hereby adopted as the opinion in this appeal.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

JOHNSON, V. C. J., and WELCH,, CORN, ARNOLD, O’NEAL, WILLIAMS and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This case was consolidated for trial in the District Court of Canadian County with the case of Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad Company v. Hale, No. 34,589, Okl.Sup., 254 P.2d 338, and the points involved in this appeal are identical with the points raised in Case No. 34,589, the only difference being that the defendant in error in this appeal was the owner of the land on which the alfalfa was grown. In case No. 34,589 Leonard E. Hale, defendant in error, was the lessee under an agricultural lease of the same land. The opinion promulgated in the latter case is applicable to this appeal, and the opinion in that case is hereby adopted as the opinion in this appeal.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

JOHNSON, V. C. J., and WELCH,, CORN, ARNOLD, O’NEAL, WILLIAMS and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1953 OK 55, 254 P.2d 342, 208 Okla. 145, 1953 Okla. LEXIS 733, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chicago-r-i-p-r-v-krumm-okla-1953.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack