Vaught v. Miners' Bank of Joplin
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from District Gowt, Stephens County; J. B. Tolbert, Judge. Action by the Miners’ Bank of Joplin against G. W. Vaught. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Citing Jones v. Bcdsley & Rogers, 25 Okla. 344, and Continental Gin Co. v. Huff, 25 Okla. 798. Citing Strange v. Crismon, 22 Okla. 841, and Great Western Mfg. Co. v. Richardson, 57 Kan. 661.
1Opinion of the CourtKane, J.
A motion to dismiss the appeal in the above-entitled cause has heretofore been overruled; but, upon a more careful examination of the authorities upon motion to rehear motion to dismiss, we are of the opinion that the motion ought to be sustained. Said action below was by the Miners’ Bank as plaintiff, versus G. W. Vaught, defendant, to recover on a promissory note and to foreclose a mortgage given to secure payment of the same. The petition alleged:
“That the defendant, G. W. Vaught, did make, execute and deliver to the Bank of Comanche, Comanche, Indian Territory, a certain promissory note…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Strange v. CrismonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1908
- Seibert v. First Nat. Bank of OkeeneSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Great Western Manufacturing Co. v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Kansas · 1897
3Cited by19 opinions
- May v. FitzpatrickSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- State Ex Rel. Mose v. District Court of Marshall CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Bowels v. CooneySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Southwestern Surety Ins. Co. v. HallSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
- Pioneer Canal Co. v. AkinWyoming Supreme Court · 1920
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.