Chesnut v. Worley
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the CourtAndrews, J.
This action was commenced by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error H. E. Worley. On application of defendant, J. B. Billingsley, A. J. Diffie, and Harold G. Chesnut were made additional defendants. The judgment was against the plaintiff and in favor of the defendant H. IT. Worley. The plaintiff appealed to this court.
The undisputed facts disclosed by the record are that the plaintiff held the legal title to an undivided three-sixteenths interest in the mineral rights in a tract of land for the benefit of himself and J. B. Billingsley, he owning two-thirds thereof and J. B.…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Forbes v. BeckerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Crutchfield v. GriffinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
- Dixon v. StoetzelSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Connor v. ThornburghSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Sanders v. KirkSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Adwon v. KetchamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934
- Fitzgearld v. FitzgearldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Strange v. MaloneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Fitzgearld v. FitzgearldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
- Taylor v. HallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935