Legal Opinion
Westheimer v. Sterling
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided December 21, 1926No. 17476PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
LOGSDON, C.
For reversal of this case plaintiffs rely upon two propositions, but the first is determinative. It reads :
“Matt Sterling held the property under a tenancy expiring December 31, 1924, by its own terms, without notice or demand for possession. He was not a tenant from year to year and was not entitled to three months’ notice to quit. He was a tenant wrongfully in possession after the expiration of his term.”
To the consideration of the above proposition a brief statement of the facts disclosed by the record is necessary and may he made in substance as follows:
On or about'…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- First Nat. Bank of Mounds v. CoxSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- Petroleum Iron Works Co. v. BullingtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- First Nat. Bank of Wetumka v. NolenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Hancock v. MaurerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Donaldson & Yahn v. City of PerrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Turner v. BishopSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937