Legal Opinion

Conoway v. Carnall

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 18, 1924No. 13078PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCochran, J.

This action was brought by the defendants in error to recover on a bond executed by the plaintiffs in error as sureties for the purpose of discharging a garnishment. The parties will be referred to as plaintiffs and defendants, as they appeared in the trial court.

The petition alleged in substance that on August 16, 1920, tjie Oklahoma National Bank of Skiatook instituted an action in the district court of Tulsa county against Leona Parks and Verona Bouton upon three promissory notes, and at the time of the institution of the suit procured the issuance of a garnishment summons, which was…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Heisen v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
  2. Forrest v. O'DonnellMichigan Supreme Court · 1880
  3. Bateman v. SissonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1886
  4. Crist v. McDanielSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1905
  5. Webb v. GarnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1835

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Milburn v. Miners' & Citizens' BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  2. Dupree v. JordanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  3. Cope v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  4. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. SilvestroOhio Supreme Court · 1932
  5. Dupree v. JordanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926

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

Powered by the Exa API