Legal Opinion

Overstreet v. Keith

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 2, 1939No. 28453PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDavison, J.

The present action was commenced by the plaintiff to secure a writ of mandamus compelling the defendant, treasurer of Pawhuska, Okla., to pay the principal and interest past due upon two certain street improvement bonds issued by the city of Pawhuska. The trial court issued an alternative writ on the plaintiff’s verified petition, but after the plaintiff in error, who is the present owner of the bonds, had been substituted as plaintiff for the plaintiff who commenced the action, a trial was had upon the issue joined by the defendant’s return to the alternative writ, and the court rendered…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lucas v. First Nat. Bank of PawneeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  2. Green v. Board of Com'rs of Lincoln CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
  3. Fooshee v. MartinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Brown-Crummer Inv. Co. v. City of PurcellCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1942
  2. McCann v. City of Enid Ex Rel. Illinois Pure Aluminum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943

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

Powered by the Exa API