Colter v. Secrest

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Colter v. Secrest

1916 OK 640, 157 P. 939, 59 Okla. 102, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 1124

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 6, 1916

Docket7409

StatusPublished

This text of 1916 OK 640 (Colter v. Secrest) 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

Colter v. Secrest, 1916 OK 640, 157 P. 939, 59 Okla. 102, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 1124 (Okla. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

BURFORD, C.

This cause was submitted on the 19th day of April, 1916. Plaintiffs in error have filed no briefs. Under the well-established rule of this court, the petition in error should be dismissed. Defendant in error has filed his motion for judgment upon the supersedeas bond. It appears that the judgment was recovered against W. J. Colter, George J. Colter, and G. F. O’Neal for the sum of $1,160, with interest thereon at 6 per cent, per annum from *103 December 4, 1014, until paid, and for costs, and that to supersede said judgment the plaintiffs in error furnished a bond, with S. L. Colter and J. H. Hensen as sureties. On the authority of Long v. Lang, 49 Okla. 342, 152 Pac. 1078, Starr v. Haygood, 53 Okla. 358, 156 Pac. 1171, and the provisions of chapter 249, Sess. Laws 1915, the plaintiff’s motion is sustained.

Judgment will therefore be entered in this court against the sureties on the appeal bond. S. L. Colter and J. H. Henson, in the sum of 81,160, with interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from December 4, 1914, and for costs, for which execution may issue.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Opinion by

BURFORD, C.

This cause was submitted on the 19th day of April, 1916. Plaintiffs in error have filed no briefs. Under the well-established rule of this court, the petition in error should be dismissed. Defendant in error has filed his motion for judgment upon the supersedeas bond. It appears that the judgment was recovered against W. J. Colter, George J. Colter, and G. F. O’Neal for the sum of $1,160, with interest thereon at 6 per cent, per annum from *103 December 4, 1014, until paid, and for costs, and that to supersede said judgment the plaintiffs in error furnished a bond, with S. L. Colter and J. H. Hensen as sureties. On the authority of Long v. Lang, 49 Okla. 342, 152 Pac. 1078, Starr v. Haygood, 53 Okla. 358, 156 Pac. 1171, and the provisions of chapter 249, Sess. Laws 1915, the plaintiff’s motion is sustained.

Judgment will therefore be entered in this court against the sureties on the appeal bond. S. L. Colter and J. H. Henson, in the sum of 81,160, with interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from December 4, 1914, and for costs, for which execution may issue.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1916 OK 640, 157 P. 939, 59 Okla. 102, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 1124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colter-v-secrest-okla-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack