Kingman & Co. v. Pixley
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the Probate Court of Pa/wnee County, before Edioard L. Lemert, Probate Judge. Action by Kingman & Co-. against Daniel Pixley. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court by
Burwell, J.:
The plaintiffs in error, Kingman & Co.,' on the - day of November, 1894, commenced a,n action against the defendant, Daniel Pixley, in the probate court of Pawnee county, on a foreign judgment fol $769.15. Issues were joined, and a trial had, which re ■suited in a judgment for the defendant. Plaintiffs appeal by transcript to this court, praying a reversal of the judgment below, and assign error as follows:
First, that the court erred in sustaining defendant’s demurrer to plaintiffs’ original petition. The record dis closes that when defendant’s demurrer to…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Young v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
- Rosa v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1877
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1892
- Oltmanns v. FindlayNebraska Supreme Court · 1896
3Cited by14 opinions
- Berry and Berry v. BartonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1902
- Tribal Development Co. v. White Bros.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Pacific Mut. Life Ins. Co. of Cal. v. O'NeilSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Stonebraker-Zea Cattle Co. v. HiltonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Weber v. DillonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1898
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.