Legal Opinion
Ludeman v. Armbruster
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided February 5, 1946No. 32087PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDavison, J.
This action was brought by.C. D. Armbruster and Vera Bernice Armbruster, husband and wife, defendants in error, hereinafter called plaintiffs, against B. W. Ludeman, plaintiff in error, hereinafter called ■defendant, to cancel a resale tax deed ■covering the east 40 feet of lot 6, block 5, Highland View addition to the city of Okmulgee, Okla. The matter was tried to the court, and from a judgment •canceling- the resale tax deed the defendant appeals to this court.
The evidence developed that lot 6 was 100 feet wide and that title was taken in the name of C. D. Armbruster by warranty deed dated…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Grimes v. CarterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- Headley v. HallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1942
- Payne v. WadeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1942
- Martin v. BodovitzSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
- Alexander v. JamesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1945
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Jones, Givens, Gotcher & Bogan, P.C. v. BergerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2002
- Le Gate v. BeckSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1948
- Keel v. JonesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
- Marlea Corp. v. CastoWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1978
- Scott v. NelsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1947
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.