Wright v. Carter

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Wright v. Carter

1933 OK 36, 18 P.2d 522, 161 Okla. 281, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 452

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 24, 1933

Docket23823

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 1933 OK 36 (Wright 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

Wright v. Carter, 1933 OK 36, 18 P.2d 522, 161 Okla. 281, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 452 (Okla. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

ANDREWS, J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus in this court whereby the petitioner seeks a writ against the respondent, the State Auditor of the state of Oklahoma, requiring and compelling him to issue warrants to the petitioner upon proper presentation of claims by the petitioner.

The' basis of the claim herein of the petitioner is that, while he was imprisoned in the penitentiary at McAlester for the commission of an offense against the laws of the state of Oklahoma, he received an accidental personal injury from falling down *282 an elevator shaft; that the Thirteenth Legislature, by Joint Resolution No. 6, authorized the petitioner to file with the State Industrial Commission a claim for the injury sustained by him; that the State Industrial Commission made a proper finding of the amount to be paid to the petitioner; that by said resolution an appropriation was made for the payment of that amount, and that the State Auditor of the state of Oklahoma has refused and is refusing to pay the same.

There are many contentions presented in the briefs filed by the petitioner, but we think the issues in this case will be settled by the application of the rules announced by this court in Hawks v. Bland, 156 Okla. 48, 9 P. (2d) 720. The petitioner contends that those rules are not applicable. We do not agree with that contention. The state is in no wise liable to the petitioner for the injury sustained by him. The legislative resolution referred to provides for a gift to him of state funds.

The application for the writ is denied.

RILEY, C. J., and SWINDALL, OSBORN, BAYLESS, BUSBY, and WELCH, JJ., concur. CULLISON, y. O. J„ and McNEILL, J., absent.

Note.—See under (2) annotation in 13 A. L. R. 1276; 46 A. L. R. 105; 25 R. C. L. 408; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. pp. 5580, 5581.

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

ANDREWS, J.

This is an original proceeding in mandamus in this court whereby the petitioner seeks a writ against the respondent, the State Auditor of the state of Oklahoma, requiring and compelling him to issue warrants to the petitioner upon proper presentation of claims by the petitioner.

The' basis of the claim herein of the petitioner is that, while he was imprisoned in the penitentiary at McAlester for the commission of an offense against the laws of the state of Oklahoma, he received an accidental personal injury from falling down *282 an elevator shaft; that the Thirteenth Legislature, by Joint Resolution No. 6, authorized the petitioner to file with the State Industrial Commission a claim for the injury sustained by him; that the State Industrial Commission made a proper finding of the amount to be paid to the petitioner; that by said resolution an appropriation was made for the payment of that amount, and that the State Auditor of the state of Oklahoma has refused and is refusing to pay the same.

There are many contentions presented in the briefs filed by the petitioner, but we think the issues in this case will be settled by the application of the rules announced by this court in Hawks v. Bland, 156 Okla. 48, 9 P. (2d) 720. The petitioner contends that those rules are not applicable. We do not agree with that contention. The state is in no wise liable to the petitioner for the injury sustained by him. The legislative resolution referred to provides for a gift to him of state funds.

The application for the writ is denied.

RILEY, C. J., and SWINDALL, OSBORN, BAYLESS, BUSBY, and WELCH, JJ., concur. CULLISON, y. O. J„ and McNEILL, J., absent.

Note.—See under (2) annotation in 13 A. L. R. 1276; 46 A. L. R. 105; 25 R. C. L. 408; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. pp. 5580, 5581.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1933 OK 36, 18 P.2d 522, 161 Okla. 281, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 452, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-carter-okla-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack