E. G. Fike Co. v. Latimer

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

E. G. Fike Co. v. Latimer

1932 OK 519, 13 P.2d 89, 158 Okla. 165, 1932 Okla. LEXIS 959

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJuly 6, 1932

DocketNo. 20615

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1932 OK 519 (E. G. Fike Co. v. Latimer) 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

E. G. Fike Co. v. Latimer, 1932 OK 519, 13 P.2d 89, 158 Okla. 165, 1932 Okla. LEXIS 959 (Okla. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

This case was tried at the same time as the case of Hiram Adams, Plaintiff, v. Town of Red Fork et al., No. 39227, in the lower court, and the petitions were practically the same, with the exception of the names of the parties and the description of the lands involved, the amounts demanded being the same.

The jury trial resulted in a verdict for $600. It was briefed in connection with No. 20613, and the evidence was practically the same. We have examined the authorities relied on, and are of the opinion that, under the evidence in this case, there was no liability. A further discussion of the matter can be found in the case of E. G. Fike Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Hiram Adams et al., Defendants in Error, No. 20613,158 Okla. 158, 13 P.2d 83, opinion this day rendered.

This case is accordingly reversed, with directions to the lower court to set aside the judgment and to dismiss the action at the cost of the defendant in error.

RILEY, HEFNER, CULLISON, SWINDALL, and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. McNEILL J., disqualified. LESTER, C. J., and CLARK, V. C. J., absent.

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

This case was tried at the same time as the case of Hiram Adams, Plaintiff, v. Town of Red Fork et al., No. 39227, in the lower court, and the petitions were practically the same, with the exception of the names of the parties and the description of the lands involved, the amounts demanded being the same.

The jury trial resulted in a verdict for $600. It was briefed in connection with No. 20613, and the evidence was practically the same. We have examined the authorities relied on, and are of the opinion that, under the evidence in this case, there was no liability. A further discussion of the matter can be found in the case of E. G. Fike Company, Plaintiff in Error, v. Hiram Adams et al., Defendants in Error, No. 20613,158 Okla. 158, 13 P.2d 83, opinion this day rendered.

This case is accordingly reversed, with directions to the lower court to set aside the judgment and to dismiss the action at the cost of the defendant in error.

RILEY, HEFNER, CULLISON, SWINDALL, and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. McNEILL J., disqualified. LESTER, C. J., and CLARK, V. C. J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1932 OK 519, 13 P.2d 89, 158 Okla. 165, 1932 Okla. LEXIS 959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/e-g-fike-co-v-latimer-okla-1932.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack