Legal Opinion

City of Picher v. Barrett

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 5, 1926No. 17230PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

STEPHENSON, C.

Mary Barrett commenced her action for damages against the city of Picher for a personal injury resulting while traveling 'Over or ■near a sidewalk of the city. The trial of the cause resulted in judgment for the plaintiff. The defendant has perfected its appeal to this court, and submits several of the rulings of the trial court as error for reversal. The assignments of error submit the proposition that the judgment is contrary to law, and not supported by sufficient competent testimony; that the court' committed error in instruction No. 11 to the jury.

Fred Vickery…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Sutton v. City of SnohomishWashington Supreme Court · 1895
  2. City of Tulsa v. WellsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  3. Young v. EatonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
  4. City of Oklahoma City v. MeyersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1896
  5. City of Hugo v. NanceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. City of Ada v. BurrowSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  2. Ponca City v. SwayneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. City of Tulsa v. LewisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
  4. City of Tulsa v. PearsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1956
  5. City of Tulsa v. PearsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API