Elliott v. Jenkins

1924 OK 1083, 231 P. 234, 107 Okla. 134, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 645
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedDecember 2, 1924
Docket15792
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 1924 OK 1083 (Elliott v. Jenkins) 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
Elliott v. Jenkins, 1924 OK 1083, 231 P. 234, 107 Okla. 134, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 645 (Okla. 1924).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from an order of the trial court setting aside the verdict of- the- jury in favor of defendant, plaintiff in error here, in an election contest.

The motion for new trial set out a number of grounds, but the order of the court, sustaining the motion does not state the grounds upon which new trial was granted. A number' of errors are assigned by defendant in the petition in error, all of which relate to the proposition that the verdict is sustained by the record in the case. In Conservative Loan Co. v. Salsbury, 75 Okla. 194, 182 Pac. 685, it is held:

“The discretion of the trial court in granting a new trial is so broad that its action in so doing will not be disturbed on appeal unless the record shows clearly that the court has erred in its view of some pure and unmixed question of law, and that the order granting a new trial is based upon such erroneous view of the law.”

Prom an examination of the order granting a new trial, we are unable to tell upon what grounds the court based its judgment in vacating the verdict and granting a new trial. Therefore, we cannot say the court erred with respect to some pure, simple, and unmixed question of law in ordering a new trial.

Por the reasons stated, the motion to dismiss is sustained and the appeal dismissed upon authority of Conservative Loan Co. v. Salsbury, supra.

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

Related

Robey v. Shapiro, Marianos & Cejda, L.L.C.
340 F. Supp. 2d 1062 (N.D. California, 2004)
City of Barnsdall v. Curnutt
1945 OK 327 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1945)
Carson v. City of Wichita
80 P.2d 1114 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1938)
Sterling Milk Products Co. v. Brown
1935 OK 777 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1935)
Mathews v. Smith
1934 OK 681 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1934)
Owens v. Wilson
1932 OK 867 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)
Western States Oil & Land Co. v. Helms
1930 OK 70 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1930)
Blue v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.
270 P. 588 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1928)
Simpson v. Baker
1926 OK 957 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1926)
Callahan v. Cowley Riddle
1926 OK 230 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1926)
Self v. Hardgrave
1926 OK 76 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1926)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1924 OK 1083, 231 P. 234, 107 Okla. 134, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 645, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/elliott-v-jenkins-okla-1924.