Legal Opinion

Bardon v. Endejan

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 3, 1928No. 18366PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The defendant in error, as plaintiff below, on June 29; 1921, began this action in replevin in the district court of Tulsa county, to recover possession of a diamond ring alleged to 'be in the possession of, and withheld from her by, the plaintiff in error, defendant below. Parties will be referred to herein as they appeared in the trial court.

The defendant answered denying generally the allegations in plaintiff’s petition. The cause was trnsferred from the district court-of Tulsa county to the common pleas court of that county and there tried to a’ jury, resulting in a verdict and judgment…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Wails v. FarringtonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  2. Hutchinson Gin Co. v. Latimer County Nat. BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  3. Gulf, Colorado & S. F. Ry. Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  4. Pfenninghausen v. HorinekSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
  5. Sample v. KingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Milwee v. RossiSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  2. Tesar v. BartelsNebraska Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Farmers National Bank of Sulphur v. BellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  4. Hung Kwong Leung v. LawMississippi Supreme Court · 1971

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

Powered by the Exa API