Legal Opinion

Milliken v. Smith

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided October 26, 1926No. 17014PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

PINKHAM, C.

The defendant in error, T. E. Smith, plaintiff below, alleges in his petition that he is the owner of lots 1 and 2, block 6, Palmer Highland addition to the city of Pawhuska, and has his dwelling and residence thereon; that said lots are bounded on the east by Bigneart. avenue, and on the north by north boundary reserve No. 2, making his lots on the corner with streets on the east and north; that plaintiff has lived on said premises for many years, and during all the time the said north boundary reserve, No. 2 has been used, treated, and considered one of the street…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Herbert v. WaggSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  2. Smith v. GardnerOregon Supreme Court · 1885
  3. Parker v. ShannonIllinois Supreme Court · 1885
  4. Tomasini v. TaylorOregon Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Graham v. WomackMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Whitaker v. Town of TiptonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
  2. Leckie v. DunbarSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  3. Mid-Continent Pipe Line Company v. EmersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1964
  4. Cooke v. Southwest Petroleum Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  5. Rowley v. Marrcrest Homeowners' Ass'nUtah Supreme Court · 1982

7 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