Legal Opinion
McCullough v. Harshman
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided June 12, 1923No. 11218PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
LOGSDON, C.
There are 12 assignments of error in the petition in error herein, but only three propositions are presented and urged in the brief of defendants, as follows:
“First. The defendant, Dr. S. S. McCullough, under the evidence as disclosed by the record could in no event be held liable for any damages suffered by the plaintiff by reason of the accident.
“Second. The jury brough in two verdicts against the defendant, Bryan McCullough; one >a general verdict and the other a special verdict for punitive damages. This was error. Also it was error to submit to the jury the question…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hays v. HoganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
- Daily v. MaxwellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- McNeal v. McKainSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Arkin v. PageIllinois Supreme Court · 1919
- Gardiner v. SolomonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1917
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Womack v. PreachArizona Supreme Court · 1945
- De Camp v. ComerfordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. WardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
- Carder v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- St. John v. IversSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.