Rhodd Et Ux. v. Hembree
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1DissentHurst, J.
I think the majority opinion reaches the wrong conclusion and is unsound in two respects.
1. It adheres to the view that a guardian who holds a secured promissory note payable to “Tom C. Waldrep, Guardian of Una Hembree, a minor,” may accept in full satisfaction thereof a renewal note made payable to “Tom C. Waldrep” only. This holding is contrary to our previous decisions that a guardian, in the absence of authorization by the court, is without authority to accept anything other than the full amount, in cash, owing thereon in satisfaction of a promissory note due the ward. Mason v. Ackley, 52…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Hayes v. Massachusetts Mutual Life InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1888
- Winona Oil Co. v. BarnesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Bunnell v. BunnellCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1901
- Garrett v. Reid-Cashion Land & Cattle Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1928
- Title Guaranty & Surety Co. v. CowenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.