South McAlester-Eufaula Telephone Co. v. State Ex Rel. Baker-Reidt Mercantile Co.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Mandamus by the State, on the relation of the Baker-Reidt Mercantile Company and others, against the South McAlester-Eufaula Telephone Company. Decree for plaintiffs and defendant brings error. Citing: Muskogee Nal. Tel. Go. v. Hall (Ind. Ter.) 64 S. W. 600; City of Si. Louis v. Tel. Go. (Mo.) 10 S. W. 197; State ex rel. v. Tel. Go. (Mo.) 88 S. W. 41; Home Tel. & Tel. Go. v. City of Los Angeles, 211 U. S. 265; People ex rel. v. Tel. Go.
Read the full summary
Mandamus by the State, on the relation of the Baker-Reidt Mercantile Company and others, against the South McAlester-Eufaula Telephone Company. Decree for plaintiffs and defendant brings error. Citing: Muskogee Nal. Tel. Go. v. Hall (Ind. Ter.) 64 S. W. 600; City of Si. Louis v. Tel. Go. (Mo.) 10 S. W. 197; State ex rel. v. Tel. Go. (Mo.) 88 S. W. 41; Home Tel. & Tel. Go. v. City of Los Angeles, 211 U. S. 265; People ex rel. v. Tel. Go. (Ill.) 77 N. E. 245; State v. Mayor, etc., of Neivark, 8 Atl. 128; State ex rel. v. Tel. Go. (Wis.) 114 N. W. 108; Mo. River Tel. Go. v. City of Mitchell (S.…
1Opinion of the CourtKaNE, C. J.
This was a proceeding in mandamus, commenced by the defendants in error, plaintiffs below, against the plaintiff in error, a corporation, defendant below, to compel it to restore certain telephone instruments to the business houses of the plaintiffs, and to furnish adequate toll service between Hartshorne and McAlester and intermediate points. Plaintiff’s petition alleged, in substance; that on or about the 29th day of June, 1904, the telephone company was granted a franchise to own, operate, and maintain a telephone exchange in the town of Hartshorne, Oklahoma; that by the terms of said…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bank of Augusta v. EarleSupreme Court of the United States · 1839
- Pensacola Telegraph Co. v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1878
- Home Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. City of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Michigan Telephone Co. v. City of Benton HarborMichigan Supreme Court · 1899
- In Re JohnstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- State ex rel. Webster v. Superior CourtWashington Supreme Court · 1912
- City of Pawhuska v. Pawhuska Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- City of Tulsa v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1935
- City of Bartlesville v. Corporation CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- St. Mary's v. Hope Gas Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1912
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.