Custer v. Fortuna Oil Co.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Custer v. Fortuna Oil Co.

1919 OK 306, 187 P. 248, 77 Okla. 257, 1919 Okla. LEXIS 281

Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided October 28, 1919·No. 9055 and 10096·Published

Opinion

RAINEY, J.

The facts in this ease are substantially the same as in the case of Charles M. Prowant et al. v. John Sealy et al., Trustees for Magnolia Petroleum Company, this day decided and the legal propositions involved are identical. The opinion in the' last named case, therefore, governs this ease and requires an affirmance of the judgment of the trial court.

It is so ordered.

OWEN, O. J., KANE, PITOHFORD, JOHNSON, HIGGINS, and BAILEY, J.T., concur; MeNEILL, J., dissents; HARRISON, J., absent.

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

RAINEY, J.

The facts in this ease are substantially the same as in the case of Charles M. Prowant et al. v. John Sealy et al., Trustees for Magnolia Petroleum Company, this day decided and the legal propositions involved are identical. The opinion in the' last named case, therefore, governs this ease and requires an affirmance of the judgment of the trial court.

It is so ordered.

OWEN, O. J., KANE, PITOHFORD, JOHNSON, HIGGINS, and BAILEY, J.T., concur; MeNEILL, J., dissents; HARRISON, J., absent.

Custer v. Fortuna Oil Co., 1919 OK 306, 187 P. 248, 77 Okla. 257, 1919 Okla. LEXIS 281 (Okla. 1919).

Pincite

1919 OK 306 (Custer v. Fortuna Oil Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.