Barringer v. Bes Line Const. Co.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from District Court, Logan County; C. F. Irwin, Judge. Action in the probate court by William Barringer against the '.Bes Line Construction Company. From a judgment for defendant in the district court on appeal from the probate court, plaintiff brings error. This action was commenced originally in the probate court of Logan county and afterwards on appeal to the district court was tried by the court upon an agreed statement of facts without the intervention of a jury.
Read the full summary
Error from District Court, Logan County; C. F. Irwin, Judge. Action in the probate court by William Barringer against the '.Bes Line Construction Company. From a judgment for defendant in the district court on appeal from the probate court, plaintiff brings error. This action was commenced originally in the probate court of Logan county and afterwards on appeal to the district court was tried by the court upon an agreed statement of facts without the intervention of a jury. The only question presented for review in this court is as to whether the district court erred in the final judgment…
1Opinion of the CourtHayes, J.
(after stating the facts as above.) The only question presented by the record in this case is whether the time checks sued upon are assignable. The language of these certificates and of the agreements executed by the payees at the time they received the time certificates is not ambiguous. It is clear that it was the intention of the construction company to stipulate and of the payees of the time checks to agree that they should not be assigned, and unless, there is some provision of law that renders this part of the contracts inoperative, plaintiff in error was not entitled to recover.
It is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Arkansas Valley Smelting Co. v. Belden Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Delaware County Commissioners v. Diebold Safe & Lock Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1890
- Burck v. TaylorSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- City of Omaha v. Standard Oil Co.Nebraska Supreme Court · 1898
- Tabler, Crudup & Co. v. Sheffiield Land, Iron & Coal Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1885
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Allhusen v. Caristo Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1952
- Reef v. Mills Novelty Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1936
- Minnetonka Oil Co. v. Cleveland Vitrified Brick Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Bankers' Nat. BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- State Bank v. Central Mercantile BankNew York Court of Appeals · 1928
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.