Legal Opinion

Culp v. Bronaugh

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 12, 1924No. 12875PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

LOGSDON, O.

Defendants have presented and argued in their brief four propositions as follows:(1) “The court erred in not rendering-judgment for plaintiffs in error on the pleadings and proofs.(2) “The court erred in sustaining motion of plaintiff for judgment on pleadings and proofs..(3) “The court erred in refusing and ruling out evidence in answer to question of attorney for defendants below.

14) “The court erred in overruling the motion of defendants for a new trial.”

Under the first proposition defendants make two contentions, which are stated in their brief, thus:

“The defendants…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Miller v. GraysonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
  2. Egan v. IngramSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
  3. Whitmire v. LevineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  4. Thompson v. RiddleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  5. Sells v. MooneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Denney v. AkersSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  2. Carter Oil Co. v. EliSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API