Grafa v. Schenck

1916 OK 911, 162 P. 1119, 62 Okla. 271, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 960
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedOctober 24, 1916
Docket7743
StatusPublished

This text of 1916 OK 911 (Grafa v. Schenck) 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
Grafa v. Schenck, 1916 OK 911, 162 P. 1119, 62 Okla. 271, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 960 (Okla. 1916).

Opinion

Opinion by

HOOKER, 0.

This is a suit instituted by the defendant in error against; the plaintiffs in error to recover a judgment upon a promissory note. The defense-relied upon here is that of usury, and it is; alleged in the answer that the defendants-have paid about $170 usury upon the note' since it was executed before the institution.' of the suit. , The record is here by transcript, and not by case-made. The errors complained of cannot be reviewed for the reason that the same requires an examination of all of the evidence; and, inasmuch as the evidence is not before us, we cannot intelligently pass upon the objections urged by the plaintiffs in error. However, it might not be amiss to say that the ease of Miller v. Oklahoma State Bank, 53 Okla. 616, 157 Pae. 767,. *272 seems to be decisive of the matters involved here.

The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

Bj the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Related

Miller v. Oklahoma State Bank of Altus
1916 OK 565 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1916 OK 911, 162 P. 1119, 62 Okla. 271, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 960, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grafa-v-schenck-okla-1916.