Legal Opinion
Hisel v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
Decided November 25, 1953No. A-11850PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJones, J.
The defendant, Edd Hisel, was charged by an information filed in the district court of Oklahoma county, along with Charles A. Litton and Grover Pendleton, with violating the terms and provisions of Title 69 O.S. 1941 § 323, as amended by House Bill No. 116 of the Session Laws of Oklahoma, 1951, in that “the defendants and each of them did purchase for and on behalf of Oklahoma county from the Metropolitan Paving Company asphaltic concrete in the total amount of ,$6,846.28, without having first advertised and considered bids for sucfi asphaltic concrete, and the said asphaltic concrete so…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Ex Parte StrauchCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1945
- State v. StegallCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1953
- Western Paint & Chemical Co. v. Board of Com'rsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
- Delano v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1946
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. HumphreyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1980
- Board of County Commissioners v. LittonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1957
- Brown v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1954
- State v. DayCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1994
- Grubbs v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma · 1966
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.