Brisley v. Mahaffey
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Plaintiff, having submitted his cause to the jury in the trial court on the issue of former adjudication, will not jbe permitted to change his theory and urge, for the first time in this court, the damages were not proper subject for counterclaim. Error from District Court, Tillman County; Frank Mathews, Judge. Action by William Mahaffey against Ben Brisley and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
1Opinion of the CourtOaven, J.
This is an action to recover on a supersedeas bond brought by the defendant in error, Mahaffey, hereafter referred to as plaintiff, against the plaintiffs in error, Brisley, hereafter referred to as defendant. The bond was executed by the Brisleys to stay the judgment rendered in an action between Mahaffey and Brisley for the recovery of money due for rent on certain lands. The case came to this court on appeal and the appeal was dismissed. 31 Okla. Ill, 119 Pac. 1128. The defendants, Brisley, in the trial of the instant case admitted the execution of the bond sued on, and pleaded, by way of…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Offutt v. WagonerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Richardson v. PennySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1900
- Border v. CarrabineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- First Nat. Bank of Lawton v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Harris v. Warren-Smith Hardware Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ruby v. WarriorSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
- Wood & Co. v. Val Blatz Brewing Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Word v. NakdimenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
- Bounds v. GoochSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Leforce v. CooperSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.