Parmenter v. Rowe

1921 OK 107, 200 P. 683, 87 Okla. 158, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 76
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMarch 29, 1921
Docket11226
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 1921 OK 107 (Parmenter v. Rowe) 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
Parmenter v. Rowe, 1921 OK 107, 200 P. 683, 87 Okla. 158, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 76 (Okla. 1921).

Opinion

JOHNSON, J.

This is an oi'iginal proceeding commenced in this court on the 25th day of February, 1920, by R. W. Parmentex*, as the guardian of Martha Jackson, an incompetent, for the purpose of procuring a writ of prohibition to be issued out of this court and directed to the county court of Okfuskee county, and the judge thereof, and W. E. McKinney, who was upon the order of said court appointed guardian of the estate of Martha Jackson, an incompetent, commanding them and each of them bo desist and refrain from further proceeding in the matters of said guardianship.

The application of the relator shows, in substance, that Martha Jackson is a full-bloodi Oreek Indian, and that prior to statehood she resided in the Indian Territory, and that her nearest court town was Wewoka, and that her father, Saber Jackson, presented a petition in the proper court at We-woka for the appointment and was by the court appointed guardian of both her person and estate; that upon the erection of the state of Oklahoma out of the Oklahoma and *159 Indian Territories, under proper orders of the court and provisions of the law governing such matters, such guardianship was duly transferred to Okemah, in Okfuskee county, Oklahoma; that after statehood, and probably in the year 1909 or 1910, proper petition for removal was filed by said ^guardian in the county court at Okemah, Okla., praying that said canse be removed tcv Seminole county, Oklahoma, for the reason that said Martha Jackson and Saber Jackson were both residents of said county, and said cause was duly and legally removed from Okfuskee county to Seminole county, and said minor’s guardianship has ever -since such removal been .pending in th-e county court of Seminole county; that after the removal of said cause to Seminole county, and after said minor had reached the age of 14 years, Saber Jackson was removed as such guardian by the county court of Seminole county, and the relator, upon a written nomination of such minor, was by said county court duly appointed the guardian of both th-e person and estate of the said Martha Jackson,- gave bond and qualified as by law1 provided, and remained such guardian of said minor up to the time, of reaching her majority, and his appointment by said county court as guardian of Martha Jackson, a-s an incompetent, and at said time he -was a resident of Seminole county, and -is -at the present time, and has had charge of both the person and estate of said minor during all of said times; and that the said minor was also a resident in good faith- of Seminole county at th-e time he was appointed guardian of her estafe, and that the county court of said .county was the -proper court of this state having jurisdiction of -both the person and estate of said Martha Jackson and that according to the rolls prepared by the Dawesi Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes said Martha Jackson reached the age of 18 years on the 10-th day of May, 1919, and that sometime prior to the said lOfch day of May, 1919, to wit, on the 23rd day of April, 1919, there was filed in the county court of Seminole county a petition by H. A. Arohard, field clerk, representing the Secretary of the Interior of the United States, stating in -substance that said minor was about to come of age, that she had a large estate, that she was an incompetent person, and that she should be so adjudged, and a guardian appointed for her person and estate in order to protect her property and estate from artful and designing persons who would when -she became of age, cheat and Swindle her of her said estate; and that, thereafter, on the 23rd day of April, 1919, the county court of Seminole county entered its order directing that notice be given t-o the duly appointed guardian of said minor, R. W. Parmenter, in person upon, said minor, and upon the father, Saber Jack-son, more than five days before the date of the hearing, and set the hearing of said petition for the 5th day of May, 1919, at the hour of 10 o’clock a. m. on said date-And that thereafter, on the 24th day of April, 1919, said notice was -served upon the relator as guardian, and on the 28th day of April, 1919, said notice -was duly served upon Saber Jackson, the father of said minor, by Frank Grail, as sheriff of Seminole county, and said notice was duly -served upon Martha Jackson in person by the sheriff of Sequoyah county, Okla., in which county sh-e was attending school at the Dwight Indian Training School under the authority and direction o-f her guardian, R-. W. Parmenter, and the county court of Seminole county, and that on the 5th day of May, 1919, the day set for the hearing of said petition, the county court of -Seminole county entered its order continuing said hearing until the 9th day of May, 1919; that thereafter, on the 0th day of May, 1919, it being made to appear to the county court of Seminole county that certain parties had gone to the school where the said R. W. Parmenter, guardian, had placed the said Martha Jackson for education and instruction, and -stolen said minor away without the knowledge or consent of either the said guardian or the county court of Seminole'county, thereupon said county court entered its order directing said guardian or sheriff of Seminole county to make search for the said minor and to bring her into court if she were found, and suffer no interference under penalty of the law; that thereafter, on the 9fch day of May, 1919, at the hour of 10 o’clock a. m., the said date, said petition to have the said Martha Jack-son adjudged an incompetent came regularly on for hearing at which hearing the said Saber Jackson filed his protest, and upon the hearing of said petition and protest said county court adjudged the said Martha Jack-son to be an incompetent person and incapable of taking care of herself and estate, and that the relator was the proper and suitable person to be appointed guardian of said incompetent, and overruled the protest of the said Saber Jackson, who excepted to the order of said court and prayed an appeal to the district court. That the relator duly qualified as guardian of the person- and estate of said Martha Jackson, an incompetent, by taking.the oath and giving bond as *160 required by law, and that on tbe 12th day of May, 1919, Saber Jackson gave notice of his appeal to the district court upon both questions of law and fact and filed his appeal bond in the sum of $200.

The finding's of the county court and order appointing the relator guardian of the person and estate of Martha Jackson, an incompetent, were as follows:

“And now on this the 9th day of May, 1919, the same being one of the regular judicial days of the April, 1919, term of this court, and the same being the day set down by proper order and order of continuance by this court for the hearing of the petition filed herein by Mr. H. A. Archard, to declare the above-named Martha Jackson an incompetent for the reason that she is a person incapable of attending to her said property and estate, and said cause coming on regularly for hearing and petitioner appearing by his attorney, C. Guy Cutlip, and the United States probate attorney, Tom Fan-cher, and Saber Jackson appearing to contest the same by W. W. Pryor, his attorney, and the court, after hearing the evidence, argument of counsel, and being fully advised in the premises, finds: That Martha Jackson is a minor and that from the records on file in the Union Agency at Muskogee, Okla., she will bo of age on the 10th day of May, 1919.

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

Related

Whitney v. Cook
1956 OK 302 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1956)
Micco v. Huser
1938 OK 655 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1938)
Harden v. District Court of Tulsa County
1935 OK 1184 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1935)
Johnston v. Guy
1933 OK 512 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1933)
Schofield v. Melton
1933 OK 447 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1933)
Carter Oil Co. v. Eli
1932 OK 747 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1932)
Myers v. Garland
1927 OK 20 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Bartlett v. Bell
257 P. 309 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1926)
Burton v. Colley
1925 OK 768 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1925)
City of Tulsa v. Corporation Commission
1922 OK 295 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1922)
Baird v. England
1922 OK 104 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1922)
McKinney v. Black Panther Oil & Gas Co.
280 F. 486 (Eighth Circuit, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1921 OK 107, 200 P. 683, 87 Okla. 158, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 76, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parmenter-v-rowe-okla-1921.