Ruemmeli v. Cravens
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the District Court of Kay County; before Bayard T. Hainer, Trial Judg.e. DISSENTING OPINION. Whereas, I am unable to concur in the majority opinion rendered by this court in this case, I deem it proper and advisable to state my reasons ior dissenting from that opinion. They are as follows: STATEMENT OE ÉACTS.
Read the full summary
Error from the District Court of Kay County; before Bayard T. Hainer, Trial Judg.e. DISSENTING OPINION. Whereas, I am unable to concur in the majority opinion rendered by this court in this case, I deem it proper and advisable to state my reasons ior dissenting from that opinion. They are as follows: STATEMENT OE ÉACTS. This is an action begun in the district court of Kay county, by Albert Reummeli, plaintiff in error, plaintiff below, to recover of the defendant, William Cravens, the sum of seven hundred and eighty-four and 55-100 dollars, appropriated and embezzled by the defendant from the…
1Opinion of the Court
Dissenting opinion by
IuwiN, J.:
The reversal of this case is asked for on three grounds, but we think it only necessary to consider the first, viz: Plaintiff in error contends that the court committed material error against him in sustaining the motion of defendant for judgment on the opening statement of counsel for plaintiff, because the license of defendant Cravens authorized him to sell the beer mentioned in said statement.
Now the motion of the defendant in error being based -entirely upon the opening statement of the counsel for plaintiff in error, it must be considered that everything…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Reeves & Co. v. SheetsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1905