Cummins v. Bridges

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Cummins v. Bridges

1914 OK 223, 140 P. 1146, 42 Okla. 200, 1914 Okla. LEXIS 330

Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided May 12, 1914·No. 3505·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Opinion by

RITTENHOUSE, C.

This is an action on a promissory note for $380.15, balance due on an open account for ' lumber. Defendant filed an answer, asking for credit of $223.39 for material returned; $7.05 for broken glass; $7 expended in obtaining glass; $50 for difference in price and grade of lumber;' and $50 for damages.' These questions were properly submitted" to the jury and a verdict returned in favor of W. J. Bridges and against B. V. Cummins for $180.76. There being sufficient evidence to support the verdict, this court will not disturb the same.

The judgment of the lower court should therefore be affirmed.

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

RITTENHOUSE, C.

This is an action on a promissory note for $380.15, balance due on an open account for ' lumber. Defendant filed an answer, asking for credit of $223.39 for material returned; $7.05 for broken glass; $7 expended in obtaining glass; $50 for difference in price and grade of lumber;' and $50 for damages.' These questions were properly submitted" to the jury and a verdict returned in favor of W. J. Bridges and against B. V. Cummins for $180.76. There being sufficient evidence to support the verdict, this court will not disturb the same.

The judgment of the lower court should therefore be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cummins v. Bridges, 1914 OK 223, 140 P. 1146, 42 Okla. 200, 1914 Okla. LEXIS 330 (Okla. 1914).

Pincite

1914 OK 223 (Cummins v. Bridges) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related