Oklahoma Tax Comission v. Liberty National Bank

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Oklahoma Tax Comission v. Liberty National Bank

1936 OK 752, 62 P.2d 1226, 178 Okla. 263, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 567

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 1, 1936

DocketNo. 26014.

StatusPublished

This text of 1936 OK 752 (Oklahoma Tax Comission v. Liberty National Bank) 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

Oklahoma Tax Comission v. Liberty National Bank, 1936 OK 752, 62 P.2d 1226, 178 Okla. 263, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 567 (Okla. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

WELCH, J.

This cause was argued and submitted with cause No. 26011, Oklahoma Tax Commission v. First National Bank of Oklahoma City, this day decided, 178 Okla. 260, 62 P. (2d) 1220: the only difference being that a cross-petition in error di *264 rects our attention to tlie fact that the court did not include judgmen. for interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from date, of the payment under protest. The pleadings of the. parties, the judgment rendered, and the questions here presented are substantially the same. The Tax Commission’s brief in cause No. 26011 is by specific request treated as its brief in this case.

The reasoning of the opinion in cause No. 26011 is applicable here, and the conclusion there is controlling here. We, therefore, adopt the syllabus of that opinion, and upon that authority the judgment here considered is modified to exclude any judgment for costs and is reversed in so far .as it denies plaintiff’s right to interest from date of payment, and in all other respects is affirmed, and upon remand the trial court is directed to render additional judgment for plaintiff for such interest.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. O. ,L, and PHELPS, CORN, and GIBSON, XL, concur. RILEY, BAYLESS, and BTJSOBY, XT., absent.

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

WELCH, J.

This cause was argued and submitted with cause No. 26011, Oklahoma Tax Commission v. First National Bank of Oklahoma City, this day decided, 178 Okla. 260, 62 P. (2d) 1220: the only difference being that a cross-petition in error di *264 rects our attention to tlie fact that the court did not include judgmen. for interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from date, of the payment under protest. The pleadings of the. parties, the judgment rendered, and the questions here presented are substantially the same. The Tax Commission’s brief in cause No. 26011 is by specific request treated as its brief in this case.

The reasoning of the opinion in cause No. 26011 is applicable here, and the conclusion there is controlling here. We, therefore, adopt the syllabus of that opinion, and upon that authority the judgment here considered is modified to exclude any judgment for costs and is reversed in so far .as it denies plaintiff’s right to interest from date of payment, and in all other respects is affirmed, and upon remand the trial court is directed to render additional judgment for plaintiff for such interest.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. O. ,L, and PHELPS, CORN, and GIBSON, XL, concur. RILEY, BAYLESS, and BTJSOBY, XT., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1936 OK 752, 62 P.2d 1226, 178 Okla. 263, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oklahoma-tax-comission-v-liberty-national-bank-okla-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack