Legal Opinion
Fidelity Nat. Bank of Oklahoma City v. Copeland
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided April 16, 1929No. 18250PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ANDREWS. J.
The plaintiff in error was-the defendant in the trial court and defendant in error was the plaintiff in the trial court, and they will be so referred to-here.
Plaintiff offered in evidence an agreed statement of facts. The defendant offered in evidence the testimony of one witness.
The court rendered judgment on the agreed statement of facts and oral testimony and found generally in favor of the plaintiff and awarded the plaintiff the suffi of $3,-492.12, with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum from the 10th day of May, 1923.
The testimony shows that the plaintiff…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Shawnee Nat. Bank v. Wootten & PottsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Shotwell v. Sioux Falls Savings BankSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914
- Kansas Flour Mills Co. v. New State Bank of WoodwardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Harriss v. ParksSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Brady v. American Nat. Bank of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Security State Bank of Comanche v. W. R. Johnston & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1951
- Fourth Nat. Bank of Tulsa v. EidsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
- Commissioners of the Land Office v. BrunsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Graves v. NichlosSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Barnsdall State Bank v. SpringerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.