Talmascy v. Thomas

1931 OK 204, 5 P.2d 759, 148 Okla. 260, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 874
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided April 28, 1931·No. 19935·Published

Opinion

RILEY, J.

The question presented in this case is substantially the same as in En-le-te-ke e.t al. v. Beasley et al., No. 19939, this day decided, 148 Okla. 255, 298 Pac. 011, and with which this case is consolidated, except there is no direct allegation or admission that the mother of the allot-tee conveyed her interest in the allotted lands during her lifetime. However, the petition does allege the death of the mother and fails to allege, that she died seized of an interest in the land, nor do plaintiffs attempt to deraign the title claimed by them by or through the mother, but claim their interest by inheritance direct from the al-lottee. The case was presented below-and here upon the same theory as the Ein-le-te-ke Case. Treating it the same here, the demurrers were properly sustained. The judgment is affirmed.

LESTER, C. J., and HEFNER, CULLISON, SWINDALL, ANDREWS, McNEILL, and KORNBGAY, JJ., concur. CLARK, V. C. J., not participating.

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

Talmascy v. Thomas, 1931 OK 204, 5 P.2d 759, 148 Okla. 260, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 874 (Okla. 1931).

1931 OK 204 (Talmascy v. Thomas) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

En-Le-Te-Ke v. Beasley
1931 OK 176 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1931)