Smock v. Carter

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Smock v. Carter

1897 OK 129, 50 P. 262, 6 Okla. 300, 1897 Okla. LEXIS 16

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 3, 1897

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 1897 OK 129 (Smock v. Carter) 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

Smock v. Carter, 1897 OK 129, 50 P. 262, 6 Okla. 300, 1897 Okla. LEXIS 16 (Okla. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

*301 Per Curiam:

This was an action in the probate court of warranty in sale of personal property. The record shows that after the amended answer had been filed, by leave of the court, and which pleaded the general issue in addition to special matters of defense pleaded in the original answer, the amendment pleading the general issue, was by the court stricken from the amended answer; that when the cause was called for trial the court required the defendant to assume the burden of establishing the issue and to introduce his testimony before any testimony had been introduced by the plaintiff; that after defendant’s testimony had been introduced, the court sustained a demurrer thereto, and thereupon and without any evidence being offered in support of the plaintiff’s petition, or to show the amount of damages, if any, to -which the plaintiff was entitled, the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount of the damages claimed in his petition, and upon such verdict, the judgment herein was rendered.

It requires no argument or citation of authorities to demonstrate that there has been no proper trial of this cause, and that the proceedings had were but a mere travesty upon judicial procedure.

The cause is therefore reversed and remanded with instructions to permit the amended answrer to be filed and proceed according to established rules.

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

*301 Per Curiam:

This was an action in the probate court of warranty in sale of personal property. The record shows that after the amended answer had been filed, by leave of the court, and which pleaded the general issue in addition to special matters of defense pleaded in the original answer, the amendment pleading the general issue, was by the court stricken from the amended answer; that when the cause was called for trial the court required the defendant to assume the burden of establishing the issue and to introduce his testimony before any testimony had been introduced by the plaintiff; that after defendant’s testimony had been introduced, the court sustained a demurrer thereto, and thereupon and without any evidence being offered in support of the plaintiff’s petition, or to show the amount of damages, if any, to -which the plaintiff was entitled, the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for the plaintiff for the full amount of the damages claimed in his petition, and upon such verdict, the judgment herein was rendered.

It requires no argument or citation of authorities to demonstrate that there has been no proper trial of this cause, and that the proceedings had were but a mere travesty upon judicial procedure.

The cause is therefore reversed and remanded with instructions to permit the amended answrer to be filed and proceed according to established rules.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1897 OK 129, 50 P. 262, 6 Okla. 300, 1897 Okla. LEXIS 16, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smock-v-carter-okla-1897.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack