Legal Opinion

Schofield v. City of Tulsa

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided September 8, 1925No. 15366PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

PINKHAM, C.

The plaintiff in erropi, as plaintiff, instituted this action against the city of Tulsa, alleging in his amended petition • that on July 28, 1909, he procured title by warranty deed from the Tulsa Addition Company to certain lots described in his deed as “All of fractional lot 1, l’ots 2 and 8, and that part of lot 7 lying north and east of the creek, all in block 95 in original town of Tulsa, Okla., according to the city engineer’s plat thereof, dated 1907”; that the city of Tulsa took possession of said premises under a purported deed of dedication, executed by…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Morgan v. Railroad Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
  2. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. MannSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
  3. Shawnee Nat. Bank v. Wootten & PottsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  4. Kee v. SatterfieldSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. Interstate Coal & Iron Co. v. Clintwood Coal & Timber Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1905

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Kinkead v. Western Atlas International, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1993
  2. State Ex Rel. Department of Highways v. RumseySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1951
  3. Younger v. Blanchard Hdwe. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
  4. Essary v. LowdenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1941
  5. Herold v. DowellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935

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

Powered by the Exa API