Legal Opinion · Dissent

Merkle v. Waldrep

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 25, 1938No. 27002Published

1DissentGibson, J.

I am unable to agree, except to a limited extent, with the rule of law as expressed in the first paragraph of syllabus of the majority opinion. Neither can I concur in the conclusion on the merits of the cause.

It is true that the county court may, in a proper case, reopen and examine the account of a former guardian at any time prior to termination of the guardianship. But the powers of the court in such case are regulated by the general statutes governing courts of record in the matter of modifying and vacating their orders and judgments (secs. 556-564, O. S. 1931).

The majority opinion…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Guardianship of Di CarloCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Ozark Oil Co. v. BerryhillSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  3. Ross v. BreeneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1922
  4. Guardianship of CardwellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  5. Calkin v. WolcottSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API