McDonald v. Brady

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

McDonald v. Brady

1902 OK 41, 69 P. 1133, 12 Okla. 5, 1902 Okla. LEXIS 46

DecidedJuly 17, 1902

StatusPublished

This text of 1902 OK 41 (McDonald v. Brady) 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

McDonald v. Brady, 1902 OK 41, 69 P. 1133, 12 Okla. 5, 1902 Okla. LEXIS 46 (Okla. 1902).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee CueiaM

: This is an action for mandatory injunction. The facts in this case are the same as those in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, decided at this sitting of this court, and for the reasons given in that case this will be reversed, and a new trial granted; and the lower court is directed to proceed in conformity with the views ex *6 pressed, in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, supra. Costs taxed to the appellee. It is further ordered that the parties be placed in the same occupancy of the land that they were in at the time of the commencement of this action and to so remain until the further order of the district court or the judge thereof; but this order is not intended to preclude the parties, or either of them from pursuing any other remedy which either may have in any of the courts of the territory.

Hainer, J., who presided in the court below, not sitting; Irwin, J., absent.

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

Pee CueiaM

: This is an action for mandatory injunction. The facts in this case are the same as those in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, decided at this sitting of this court, and for the reasons given in that case this will be reversed, and a new trial granted; and the lower court is directed to proceed in conformity with the views ex *6 pressed, in the case of Anderson v. Ferguson, supra. Costs taxed to the appellee. It is further ordered that the parties be placed in the same occupancy of the land that they were in at the time of the commencement of this action and to so remain until the further order of the district court or the judge thereof; but this order is not intended to preclude the parties, or either of them from pursuing any other remedy which either may have in any of the courts of the territory.

Hainer, J., who presided in the court below, not sitting; Irwin, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1902 OK 41, 69 P. 1133, 12 Okla. 5, 1902 Okla. LEXIS 46, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdonald-v-brady-okla-1902.