Jackson v. McKay

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Jackson v. McKay

1923 OK 181, 213 P. 876, 89 Okla. 119, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1010

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 27, 1923

Docket10289

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1923 OK 181 (Jackson v. McKay) 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

Jackson v. McKay, 1923 OK 181, 213 P. 876, 89 Okla. 119, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1010 (Okla. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This ease involves the allotment of Elijah Roe, a freedman citizen of the Creek Nation, who died July 17, 1911, intestate, unmarried, and; without issue, leaving his father, Marshall Roe, enrolled as a Seminole freedman and various brothers and sisters (including the plaintiff in error) who are duly enrolled Creek fneedmen. Edmond McKay purchased the land from Marshall Roe. the father of the allottee, November 16, 1911, and all the brothers and sisters of the allottee executed- deeds conveying (heir interest in the land to McKay.

Mollie Jackson, the plaintiff in error, being a sister of Elijah Roe, contended that Marshall Roe did not inherit the allotment of Elijah Roe, for the reason he was not a Creek citizen, nor descendant of a Creek citizen, and brought suit to cancel her deed to McKay on the ground of fraud, she contending she inherited an undivided one-sixth interest in the land.

Under the decisions of this court, in the following cases: In re Estate of Pigeon, 81 Okla. 180, 198 Pac. 309: and Teague v. Smith, 85 Okla. 12, 204 Pac. 439, and the case of Harrison v. Harrison, 87 Okla. _, 209 Pac. 737, the father of Marshall Roe inherited the land, and plaintiff in error inherited no interest therein. Therefore the allegations of fraud in procuring the deed from her became immaterial, for the reason the plaintiff in error inherited no interest in the land.

For the reasons stated, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Concurred in by the Court.

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

PER CURIAM.

This ease involves the allotment of Elijah Roe, a freedman citizen of the Creek Nation, who died July 17, 1911, intestate, unmarried, and; without issue, leaving his father, Marshall Roe, enrolled as a Seminole freedman and various brothers and sisters (including the plaintiff in error) who are duly enrolled Creek fneedmen. Edmond McKay purchased the land from Marshall Roe. the father of the allottee, November 16, 1911, and all the brothers and sisters of the allottee executed- deeds conveying (heir interest in the land to McKay.

Mollie Jackson, the plaintiff in error, being a sister of Elijah Roe, contended that Marshall Roe did not inherit the allotment of Elijah Roe, for the reason he was not a Creek citizen, nor descendant of a Creek citizen, and brought suit to cancel her deed to McKay on the ground of fraud, she contending she inherited an undivided one-sixth interest in the land.

Under the decisions of this court, in the following cases: In re Estate of Pigeon, 81 Okla. 180, 198 Pac. 309: and Teague v. Smith, 85 Okla. 12, 204 Pac. 439, and the case of Harrison v. Harrison, 87 Okla. _, 209 Pac. 737, the father of Marshall Roe inherited the land, and plaintiff in error inherited no interest therein. Therefore the allegations of fraud in procuring the deed from her became immaterial, for the reason the plaintiff in error inherited no interest in the land.

For the reasons stated, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Concurred in by the Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK 181, 213 P. 876, 89 Okla. 119, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 1010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-mckay-okla-1923.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack