Legal Opinion
Brogden v. Perryman
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided April 7, 1936No. 24631PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PHELPS J.
H. M. Hoffman and J. J. O’Connell were partners engaged in the gen-' eral insurance agency business in the city of Tulsa. Arthur Perryman, p’aintiff in the trial court, and Dr. J. C. Brogden, one of the defendants in the trial court, signed, as sureties, several agency bonds for Hoffman and O’Connell. They defaulted in remittances to one of their companies and, Perry-man being away from the city at the time, Dr. Brogden advanced the total sum of $3,880 to make good this default, for which sum Hoffman and O’Connell executed to Brogden their promissory notes. Default to another company…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kingfisher Mill & Elev. Co. v. WestbrookSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Rider v. MorganSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Brooks v. J. R. Watkins Medical Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Swift v. McMurraySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
- Kershaw v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
3Cited by7 opinions
- Employers Reinsurance Corp. v. Mid-Continent Casualty Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- Fowler v. Lincoln County Conservation DistrictSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2000
- Altshuler v. MalloySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1963
- Polk v. BartlettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1961
- Pollock Stores Co. v. DraperSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1950
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.