Gann v. Ball
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the United States Court for the Southern District of the Indian Territory, at Byan; J. T. Dickerson, Judge. Action by M. F. Ball against W. N. Gann. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. On question of time of performance of contracts: Hart v. Bullion, 48 Texas, 278; Watts v. Sheppard, 2 Ala. 425; Lindsey v. Police Jury, 16 La, Ann. 389; Scully v. Hamilton, 19 Ill. App. 286.
1Opinion of the CourtWilliams, J.
The first assignment of error relates to plaintiff’s being permitted to testify that he was prevented from filing on the land selected for such purpose for him by defendant under the terms of the contract on account of the rules and regulations of the land office requiring him to file on his homestead allotment before filing on his surplus allotment. In this- we do not think that the court erred, although the plaintiff admitted that he heard that such rule obtained in the land office before attempting to file. For he further testified that he, at such time, intended to file on his homestead,…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Chicago v. SheldonSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- Topliff v. TopliffSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- District of Columbia v. GallaherSupreme Court of the United States · 1888
- Choctaw, O. G. R. Co. v. BurgessSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Moore v. AdamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Frank Oil Co. v. Belleview Gas & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Midland Valley R. Co. v. LarsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Midland Savings & Loan Co. v. SuttonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Herron v. M. Rumley Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
- Bledsoe v. WortmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.