Legal Opinion

Flynn v. Lowrance

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided December 16, 1924No. 15124PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

MAXEY, C.

The question involved in this appeal is whether the court had a right to dispossess the interveners, Dofe Veteto and Beulah Shilkett, who held a lease executed by the mortgagor and the mortgagee on the 28th day of July, 1923, to Mrs. W. E. Arthur, and by her assigned to the interveners, with the consent of the mortgagor, and who had been in possession of-the property under a prior lease and running it as a moving picture show, fit appears that in the order appointing H. C. Hughes receiver it directed Hughes to take possession of the property. He construed that to mean that…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Lawson v. WarrenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Ardmore Nat. Bank v. Briggs MacHinery & Supply Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
  3. Miller v. Superior Court of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  4. St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Ravia Granite Ballast Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Norman v. Trison Development Corp.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
  2. Turk v. KramerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  3. Wilkins v. GannonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. State Ex Rel. v. District Court of Tulsa CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1932
  5. State ex rel. Doak v. Pride National Insurance Co.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API