Legal Opinion

Goodrich v. Williamson

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided August 25, 1899PublishedCited by 11 opinions

Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before J. R. Keaton, District Judge. STATEMENT OF THE CASE. This is a suit brought to recover the sum of $5,000.00, the amount of a promissory note dated August 17, 1895, given by the defendant Williamson, to Mrs. M. I. Dowden, payable in a year, and assigned for value, as declared in the petition, on August 19, 1897, to Goodrich.

Read the full summary

Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before J. R. Keaton, District Judge. STATEMENT OF THE CASE. This is a suit brought to recover the sum of $5,000.00, the amount of a promissory note dated August 17, 1895, given by the defendant Williamson, to Mrs. M. I. Dowden, payable in a year, and assigned for value, as declared in the petition, on August 19, 1897, to Goodrich. The suit was begun September 23,1896. Thereafter, on September 29, 1896, the Oklahoma National Bank, upon its own motion, and without leave, filed a pleading in the cause which it termed an “interplea.” This…

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion of the court by

McAtee, J.:

The errors assigned by the plaintiff are argued upon the proposition that the action was a suit to recover the amount due upon a promissory note, that the bank should not have been permitted to intervene, and that Williamson should not have been permitted to pay the money into court, and that the note should not have been delivered to him.

The provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, which are principally relied upon by the bank to sustain its right of intervention, are secs. 36 and 41 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which reads as follows:

“(3908). Sec. 36.…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Chapman v. . ForbesNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Standley v. RobertsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1894
  3. Beck v. BurdettNew York Court of Chancery · 1829
  4. Burgert v. BorchertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1875
  5. Shaw v. CosterNew York Court of Chancery · 1840

23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Clevenger v. LewisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
  2. Mount, Gdn. v. SchulteSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
  3. Barnett v. BodleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1959
  4. Bilby v. StuartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
  5. Cooke v. TankersleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1948

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API