Hargadine-Mckittrick Dry Goods Co. v. Breedlove
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from Carter County Court; W. D. Potter, Judge. Action by the Hargadine-McKittrick Dry Goods Company and others against C. V. Breedlove. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
AMES, C.
This action was brought by the plaintiffs to recover from the defendant the sum of $500, which he owed the Model Dry Goods Company on a subscription for that amount of the capital stock of the corporation. The dry goods company was indebted to the plaintiffs, and, as security for the indebtedness, assigned to a trustee for their benefit the defendant’s subscription, together with a number of others. The defendant’s answer contained a general denial, and, in addition, a specific denial that he had any interest in the Model Dry Goods Company, directly or indirectly, or that he…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Camden v. StuartSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Melone v. RuffinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1900
- Barrett-Hicks Co. v. GlasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
- Lapham v. Kansas & Texas Oil, Gas & Pipe Line Co.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1912
- Ferguson & Wheeler v. DaltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1900
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- City of Heavener v. TerrySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Baldwin v. Timber Investment Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1918