Miner v. Fowler

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Miner v. Fowler

1937 OK 282, 67 P.2d 799, 180 Okla. 45, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 548

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 27, 1937

DocketNo. 26864.

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1937 OK 282 (Miner v. Fowler) 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

Miner v. Fowler, 1937 OK 282, 67 P.2d 799, 180 Okla. 45, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 548 (Okla. 1937).

Pincite

Opinion

HURST, J.

Pearl Fowler sued J. A. *46 Miner to recover damages for injuries received in an automobile accident resulting from the alleged negligence of the driver of a motor truck owned by Miner. The truck was being operated under a permit issued by the Corporation Commission and carried liability insurance as a prerequisite to the issuance of the permit. The insurance carrier, Commercial Standard Insurance Company, was joined as a party defendant on the ground that it was jointly and severally liable with the defendant Miner for the injuries sustained. The defendant Miner filed a motion to strike all the allegations relative to his codefendant insurance company on the ground of mis-joinder of causes of action, misjoinder of parties defendant, and that the action against the insurance company was prematurely brought, which motion was overruled. The defendant insurance company filed a demurrer on the ground of misjoin-der of causes of action and misjoinder of parties defendant, and for the further reason that the action was prematurely brought against it. This demurrer was overruled and exceptions properly saved to both of these orders.

The case was tried to a jury, with a resulting verdict in favor of plaintiff against both defendants, and judgment rendered thereon. A joint motion for new trial was filed and overruled, and a joint petition in error has been filed in this court -by both defendants.

Plaintiffs in error state that there is but one question for determination:

“That the court erred in permitting the defendant Commercial Insurance Company to be made, and to remain, a party defendant in the trial of said action in the lower court, over the objection of both defendants.”

The case of Enders v. Longmire, Adm’r, 179 Okla. 633, 67 P. (2d) 12, is decisive of the issue presented herein and holds adversely to the contention of plaintiffs in error. The judgment is affirmed.

OSBORN, C. J., BATLESS, V. C. J., and RILEY, WELCH, PHELPS, . and CORN, JJ., concur. GIBSON, J., dissents. BUSBY, J., absent.

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

HURST, J.

Pearl Fowler sued J. A. *46 Miner to recover damages for injuries received in an automobile accident resulting from the alleged negligence of the driver of a motor truck owned by Miner. The truck was being operated under a permit issued by the Corporation Commission and carried liability insurance as a prerequisite to the issuance of the permit. The insurance carrier, Commercial Standard Insurance Company, was joined as a party defendant on the ground that it was jointly and severally liable with the defendant Miner for the injuries sustained. The defendant Miner filed a motion to strike all the allegations relative to his codefendant insurance company on the ground of mis-joinder of causes of action, misjoinder of parties defendant, and that the action against the insurance company was prematurely brought, which motion was overruled. The defendant insurance company filed a demurrer on the ground of misjoin-der of causes of action and misjoinder of parties defendant, and for the further reason that the action was prematurely brought against it. This demurrer was overruled and exceptions properly saved to both of these orders.

The case was tried to a jury, with a resulting verdict in favor of plaintiff against both defendants, and judgment rendered thereon. A joint motion for new trial was filed and overruled, and a joint petition in error has been filed in this court -by both defendants.

Plaintiffs in error state that there is but one question for determination:

“That the court erred in permitting the defendant Commercial Insurance Company to be made, and to remain, a party defendant in the trial of said action in the lower court, over the objection of both defendants.”

The case of Enders v. Longmire, Adm’r, 179 Okla. 633, 67 P. (2d) 12, is decisive of the issue presented herein and holds adversely to the contention of plaintiffs in error. The judgment is affirmed.

OSBORN, C. J., BATLESS, V. C. J., and RILEY, WELCH, PHELPS, . and CORN, JJ., concur. GIBSON, J., dissents. BUSBY, J., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1937 OK 282, 67 P.2d 799, 180 Okla. 45, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 548, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miner-v-fowler-okla-1937.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack