Minnetonka Oil Co. v. Cleveland Vitrified Brick Co.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from District' Court, Pawnee County; Bayard T. Rainer, Judge. Action by the Cleveland Vitrified Brick Company against the Minnetonka Oil Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. On question of equitable jurisdiction: Xenia Beal Estate Co. v. Macy (Ind.) 47 N. E. 147; School Dist. v. Ohio Gas. Co. (Pa.) 25 Atl. 868; Graves v. Gas. Co. (Iowa) 50 N. W. 283; Williams v. Neely, 134 Eed. 1. On assignability of contract: Am.
Read the full summary
Error from District' Court, Pawnee County; Bayard T. Rainer, Judge. Action by the Cleveland Vitrified Brick Company against the Minnetonka Oil Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. On question of equitable jurisdiction: Xenia Beal Estate Co. v. Macy (Ind.) 47 N. E. 147; School Dist. v. Ohio Gas. Co. (Pa.) 25 Atl. 868; Graves v. Gas. Co. (Iowa) 50 N. W. 283; Williams v. Neely, 134 Eed. 1. On assignability of contract: Am. Bonding & Trust Co. v. Railroad Co., 124 Eed. 866; Edmonds v. Railroad Co., 80 Eed. 78; Horst v. Roehm, 84 Eed. 565; Larne v. Goezinger (Cal.), 24 Pac.…
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The following questions are raised by the plaintiff in error in this case: (1) That injunction is not the proper remedy; (2) that the parties executing the contract on the part of the plaintiff in error, a corporation, did not act within the scope of their authority; (3) that the contract had not been complied with by the Hammar Brick Company before the same was assigned to the defendant in error; (4) that the contract was not assignable.
1. The aid of equity may be invoked to stay a wrong, when relief at law would occasion a multiplicity of suits. In Johnson et al. v. Swanke, 128 Wis. 68, 107…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Railway Co. v. McCarthySupreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Arkansas Valley Smelting Co. v. Belden Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Boston Ice Co. v. PotterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1877
- Glenn v. MarburySupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Rochester Lantern Co. v. Stiles & Parker Press Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1892
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- United States v. L. C. ChapmanCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1960
- Mussellem v. Magnolia Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- In Re KaufmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2001
- Momand v. Twentieth-Century Fox Film CorporationDistrict Court, W.D. Oklahoma · 1941
- Chas. T. Derr Construction Co. v. GelruthSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.