Watson v. Ellis

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Watson v. Ellis

1929 OK 132, 279 P. 325, 137 Okla. 300, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 458

Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided March 19, 1929·No. 18181·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

HUNT, J.

The identical question here involved was decided adverse to the contention of plaintiff in error herein in No. 17993, Anna Eva Jacobs, nee Carney, v. Sallie E. Ambrister et al., in an opinion by this court filed on the 17th day of April, 1928, 137 Okla. 227, 278 Pac. 653, following the rule announced in No. 18265, Levina Cooper, nee Perry, v. Spiro State Bank, 137 Okla. 265, 278 Pac. 648. Said eases are controlling here and decisive of the questions presented in this appeal.

It therefore follows that the judgment appealed from herein must be and the same is hereby affirmed.

LESTER, V. C. J., and CLARK, CULLI-SON, SWINDALL, and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. RILEY, J., dissents. HEFNER, J., net participating. MASON, C. J., absent.

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

HUNT, J.

The identical question here involved was decided adverse to the contention of plaintiff in error herein in No. 17993, Anna Eva Jacobs, nee Carney, v. Sallie E. Ambrister et al., in an opinion by this court filed on the 17th day of April, 1928, 137 Okla. 227, 278 Pac. 653, following the rule announced in No. 18265, Levina Cooper, nee Perry, v. Spiro State Bank, 137 Okla. 265, 278 Pac. 648. Said eases are controlling here and decisive of the questions presented in this appeal.

It therefore follows that the judgment appealed from herein must be and the same is hereby affirmed.

LESTER, V. C. J., and CLARK, CULLI-SON, SWINDALL, and ANDREWS, JJ., concur. RILEY, J., dissents. HEFNER, J., net participating. MASON, C. J., absent.

Watson v. Ellis, 1929 OK 132, 279 P. 325, 137 Okla. 300, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 458 (Okla. 1929).

Pincite

1929 OK 132 (Watson v. Ellis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related