Legal Opinion
Lashley v. Moore
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided May 19, 1925No. 12800PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
ESTES, C.
Parties appear in the same order as in the trial court. From an order sustaining demurrers of defendants to amended petition of plaintiff, plaintiff brings error. The sole question is, Does the amended petition state a cause of action? Plaintiff alleged that in 1916, Thomas Haynes, Jr., was the owner of the legal and equitable title to certain 160 acres; that he was a full-blood Creek Indian and had inherited the land from a full-blood Indian; that in 1916, the title of said Haynes to such land was clouded by a purported warranty deed from himself to defendant Lake Moore,…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Walker v. BrownSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Christmas v. RussellSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
- Fourth Street Bank of Philadelphia v. YardleySupreme Court of the United States · 1897
- Ingersoll v. CoramSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Ketchum v. St. LouisSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Howard v. Oklahoma Corp. CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1980
- City of Barnsdall v. CurnuttSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
- Callahan v. Cowley RiddleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Emery v. GoffSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
- Sutton v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1938
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.