Central Nat. Oil Co. v. Continental Supply Co.
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
LOGSDON. O.
At the outset this court js confronted by a motion contained in plaintiff’s brief to dismiss this proceeding for failure of defendant to comply with rule 25 of this court in the preparation and arrangement of its brief, and in the presentation of its argument therein. This criticism of defendant’s brief is not without basis, but in view of the disposition which this case merits, the motion to d.smiss will be denied for the reasons and in the language used by this court in Crossan v. Cooper, 41 Okla. 281, 137 Pac. 354:
“There is some merit to this objection, but the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Wagner v. LucasSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Standard Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Anthony Wholesale Grocery Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Rogers, County Treasurer v. Bass Harbour Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Pulaski Oil Co. v. ConnerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- La Bellman v. Gleason & Sanders, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1966
- Wagoner Oil & Gas Co. v. MarlowSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
- Javine v. JavineSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Renegar v. FlemingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1949
- Fuqua v. WatsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.