Talley v. Kingfisher Improvement Co.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from, District Court, Comanche County; F. E. Gillette, Judge. Action by the Kingfisher Improvement Company against May B. Talley and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. citing: Argu-ello v. Bours (Cal.) 8 Pac. 49; Tibeau v. Tibewa, 19 Mo. 78; Turpin v. Railroad Co., 105 Ill. 11; Gigler v. Baker (Neb.) 58 N. W. 1026; Morton v. Dickson (Ky.) 14 .S. W. 905; Holcomb v. Dowell, 15 Kan. 289; Coolbaugh v. Roemer (Minn.) 21 N. W. 472.
1Opinion of the Court
TüRNER, J.
On July 3, 1903, the Kingfisher Improvement Companjr, defendant in error, plaintiff below, brought suit in ejectment against May B, Talley, plaintiff in error, defendant below, in the district court of Comanche county, to recover possession of lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6, in block 13 in the town of Waurika. Her answer contains a general denial, and, insubstance, states: That on or about the 18th day of June, 1902, in said town, she entered into contract in writing with plaintiff in which plaintiff agreed to convey said lots to her by warranty deed in consideration’ that she within 10…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Love v. WatkinsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1871
- Grace v. MeansSupreme Court of Georgia · 1907
- De Arguello v. BoursCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885
- Walker v. DavidSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1901
- Coles v. MeskimenOregon Supreme Court · 1906
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Kingfisher Improvement Co. v. TalleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Asher v. HullSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1952
- Tyler Commercial College v. StapletonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Nations v. StoneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Reynolds v. BeanSupreme Court of Vermont · 1917
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.