Legal Opinion
Hill v. Jones
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided February 23, 1937No. 26470PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPhelps, J.
Plaintiff in the trial court, defendant in error here, has moved to dismiss this appeal by reason of certain claimed irregularities in the settlement of the case-made. The motion was heretofore denied, but has been re-presented in the brief of defendant in error. The same principles apply .as are involved in the cases of American Surety Co. v. Wolsey, 163 Okla. 270, 20 P. (2d) 158; Embry, Receiver, v. Villines, 175 Okla. 552, 53 P. (2d) 277, and Security Bldg. & Loan Ass’n v. Ward, 174 Okla. 238, 50 P. (2d) 651, and on the authority of those cases we adhere to our former ruling.
Wilson…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Nixon v. Wichita Land and Cattle Co.Texas Supreme Court · 1892
- Chancey v. WhinnerySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Coleman v. JamesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Security Building & Loan Ass'n v. WardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Emery v. VillinesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- D. P. Greenwood Trucking Co. v. State Industrial CommissionSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954
- In Re Milton's EstateSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
- Goldfeder v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1964
- Allen v. AllenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
- Johnson v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938