State v. Huppert

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

State v. Huppert

1917 OK 239, 165 P. 193, 65 Okla. 162, 1917 Okla. LEXIS 44

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 15, 1917

Docket7477

StatusPublished

This text of 1917 OK 239 (State v. Huppert) 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

State v. Huppert, 1917 OK 239, 165 P. 193, 65 Okla. 162, 1917 Okla. LEXIS 44 (Okla. 1917).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

HOOKER, C.

This action was originally instituted in the county court of Rogers county by the state of Oklahoma, acting through the county attorney, to confiscate one certain automobile on account of it being used in the transportation of liquor in violation of law in said county. The proper proceedings were had for that purpose, and at the proper time L. A. Huppert intervened, claiming to hold a chattel mortgage duly recorded upon said automobile, and that, if the same was being used in transportation of liquor in violation of law, the same was without his knowledge or consent.

The cause was tried in the-county court, and after the evidence for the intervener and the state was heard by the court, the jury being waived, a judgment was rendered in behalf of the intervener, directing the return *163 of the automobile to him, from which judgment the state has appealed.

The county attorney has not filed any brief on behalf of the state, and under the rule of this court the appeal will be treated as haying been abandoned, and the same is therefore dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Opinion by

HOOKER, C.

This action was originally instituted in the county court of Rogers county by the state of Oklahoma, acting through the county attorney, to confiscate one certain automobile on account of it being used in the transportation of liquor in violation of law in said county. The proper proceedings were had for that purpose, and at the proper time L. A. Huppert intervened, claiming to hold a chattel mortgage duly recorded upon said automobile, and that, if the same was being used in transportation of liquor in violation of law, the same was without his knowledge or consent.

The cause was tried in the-county court, and after the evidence for the intervener and the state was heard by the court, the jury being waived, a judgment was rendered in behalf of the intervener, directing the return *163 of the automobile to him, from which judgment the state has appealed.

The county attorney has not filed any brief on behalf of the state, and under the rule of this court the appeal will be treated as haying been abandoned, and the same is therefore dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1917 OK 239, 165 P. 193, 65 Okla. 162, 1917 Okla. LEXIS 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-huppert-okla-1917.