Legal Opinion

M. & D. Finance Co. v. Methvin

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 14, 1939No. 29117PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDavison, J.

The present action was instituted on May 11, 1937, by the plaintiff in error, as plaintiff, to recover from the defendants in error, as defendants, the immediate possession of, or value of a Chevrolet automobile. The plaintiff’s cause of action was alleged to have arisen as a result of the defendants’ default in the payment of a promissory note executed by the defendants and held by the plaintiff, together with a chattel mortgage on said automobile to secure the payment of the note. In commencing the action, the plaintiff not only filed a petition, but also filed a replevin bond and affidavit…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Perkins v. BrownTennessee Supreme Court · 1915
  2. Thomas v. First Nat. Bank of TecumsehSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  3. Rapp v. Mabbett Motor Car Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1922
  4. Francis v. Guaranty State Bank of TexolaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914
  5. Consolidated National Bank v. CunninghamArizona Supreme Court · 1925

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Steel Motor Service, Inc. v. ZalkeCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1954
  2. Joy v. GiglioSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API