Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Cudjo v. Harris

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 16, 1926No. 15516PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

LOGSDON, C.

This proceeding brings into question the validity of the sale proceedings based upon the decree of foreclosure. The motion to vacate does not question the validity of the foreclosure decree, but is directed to the sale proceedings based on that decree and to the order of the court confirming such sale. The decree of sale reads:

“And it is further ordered and adjudged by the court that an order of sale issue to the sheriff of said county ofi Seminole, state of Oklahoma, commanding him to advertise and sell, according to law, after legal appraisement. in order to satisfy the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Bolling v. CampbellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. National Surety Co. v. S. H. Hanson Builders' Supply Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
  3. Hancock v. YoureeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
  4. Sawyer v. WareSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  5. Tolbert v. State Bank of PadenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Cuff v. KosloskySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  2. Hamilton by and Through Hamilton v. VadenSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1986
  3. Pfister v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  4. Crockett v. RootSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1943
  5. Jewel Tea Co. v. RansdellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API