Legal Opinion

Foreman v. Marks

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 2, 1926No. 16038PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

SHACKELFORD, C.

The plaintiff in error will he referred to heroin as tlie plaintiff, and tlie defendants in erról-as* defendants, as the parties appeared in the trial court.

The plaintiff commenced liis suit in the district court of Washington county, on the 6th day of December, 1912, for the possession of land in Washington county, the surplus allotment of the plaintiff as a Cherokee freedman, containing 50 acres of land; and, for damages for unlawful detention, rents, and profits derived from the land during eight years- The gist' of plaintiff’s petition is in ejectment, except he…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Sandlin v. BarkerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  2. Rowe v. McIntoshSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  3. Foreman v. MarksSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Neustadt v. Coline Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929

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

Powered by the Exa API