Johnson v. McDonald
This text of 1934 OK 743 (Johnson v. McDonald) 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.
Opinion
The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants to recover a judgment for an alleged balance on a promissory note. The defense was misrepresentation and fraud in the inducement leading up to the execution thereof, The cause was tried to the court. Judgment was rendered for the defendants, and the plaintiff appealed.
The questions presented to this court for determination are: Was fraud sufficiently alleged and proven, and was there a sufficient restoration or offer to restore? Those were questions of fact upon which the court passed, and there being competent evidence *118 reasonably tending to sustain tbe judgment of tbe trial court in a law action tried without a jury, the judgment must be and is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1934 OK 743, 39 P.2d 150, 170 Okla. 117, 1934 Okla. LEXIS 692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-mcdonald-okla-1934.