Lawton v. Shepard

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Lawton v. Shepard

1913 OK 20, 130 P. 135, 36 Okla. 772, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 957

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 7, 1913

Docket2485

StatusPublished

This text of 1913 OK 20 (Lawton v. Shepard) 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

Lawton v. Shepard, 1913 OK 20, 130 P. 135, 36 Okla. 772, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 957 (Okla. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

AMES, C.

This action of replevin for the recovery of a hog of the value of $16.50 originated in the justice court of Pawnee county. The plaintiff won. The defendant appealed to the county court, where the plaintiff again won. The appeal is without merit. The brief of the plaintiff in error does not comply with rule 25 (20 Okla. xii, 95 Pac. viii), and no authorities are cited. The principal point raised is that opinion evidence as to the identity of the hog was incompetent, and"that it should have been confined to a description of his marks, color, and brands. We do not concur in this contention.

The judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Opinion by

AMES, C.

This action of replevin for the recovery of a hog of the value of $16.50 originated in the justice court of Pawnee county. The plaintiff won. The defendant appealed to the county court, where the plaintiff again won. The appeal is without merit. The brief of the plaintiff in error does not comply with rule 25 (20 Okla. xii, 95 Pac. viii), and no authorities are cited. The principal point raised is that opinion evidence as to the identity of the hog was incompetent, and"that it should have been confined to a description of his marks, color, and brands. We do not concur in this contention.

The judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1913 OK 20, 130 P. 135, 36 Okla. 772, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 957, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lawton-v-shepard-okla-1913.