Manglesdorf Seed Co. v. Busby
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
LOGSDON, C.
Defendant’s first proposition under its numerous assignments of ernoir presents alleged error of the trial court in the exclusion of certain evidence offered by defendant, and in giving in charge to the jury paragraph No. 4 of the instructions.
Defendant Sam Dorchester was a witness for plaintiffs and upon cross-examination identified the invoice covering the particular shipment of seeds here involved. This invoice was then offered in evidence by defendant seed company, when the following occurred:
“Mr. Melton: If the court please, the plaintiff has no objections to the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Coyle and Smith v. BaumSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1895
- Geren v. Courts Trading Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
3Cited by11 opinions
- India Paint and Lacquer Co. v. United Steel Prod. Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Anderson v. ThomasSupreme Court of Kansas · 1959
- Rocky Mountain Seed Co. v. KnorrSupreme Court of Colorado · 1933
- Ponca City Milling Co. v. KrowSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Griffin v. AsburySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.