Legal Opinion

City of Tulsa v. Parrish

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided December 23, 1958No. 38108PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BLACKBIRD, Justice.

Defendant in error is a former policeman of the City that appears herein as plaintiff in error. He instituted this action, as plaintiff, against said City, as defendant, after his discharge from said employment, seeking recovery of certain sums allegedly due him from said City as salary, and "earned vacation pay" as stich police officer before he was validly, or finally, discharged in accord with the ordinances of the defendant city governing the matter. Our continued reference to the parties will be by their trial court designations.

As the salary plaintiff sought from…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  2. State ex rel. Clapp v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
  3. Adams v. City of AnadarkoSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1949
  4. State ex rel. Campbell v. Police CommissionersMissouri Court of Appeals · 1884
  5. Board of County Commissioners v. LittonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Livingston v. MaxwellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960
  2. Board of County Commissioners of the County of Seminole v. HutchisonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1965

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

Powered by the Exa API