Legal Opinion

Stroup v. Brittain

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 7, 1924No. 14943PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

MAXEY, C.

The parties will be referred ,to as they appeared in the court b.elow.

Wm. A. Brittain sued the defendant, Mrs. D. H. Stroup, guardian of D. II. Stroup, an incompetent, for a commission on the-sale of a stock of goods and recovered judgment in the court below, through the verdict of a jury, for $150, and defendant appeals. There are only two questions argued in the brief of counsel for plaintiff in error, and may be stated as follow®:

“First, that plaintiff below is not entitled to recover, because there is a variance between ■ the proof and the petition; second, that the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Patterson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  2. Incorporated Town of Wetumka v. BurkeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. City of Holdenville v. KiserSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937
  2. Kurz v. StaffordSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  3. Plains Petroleum Corp. v. HatcherSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  4. Treadway v. Uniroyal Tire Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
  5. Treadway v. Uniroyal Tire Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API