Legal Opinion

Proctor v. Sisler

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 29, 1938No. 28070PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

PHELPS. J.

The plaintiff is a physician. He recovered a judgment against the defendant for medical services rendered a small girl who had been injured by defendant’s wife in an automobile accident, and the defendant appeals.

The defendant’s brief does not, but the plaintiff’s brief does, contain a statement of the facts, and the latter will therefore be taken as the facts of the casé for the purpose of deciding the appeal. Tiger et al. v. Coker et al., 180 Okla. 175, 68 P.2d 509.

The defendant’s wife, driving his car, ran over the little girl, and the latter was immediately taken to a hospital,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Kesler and Dodson v. CheadleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1903
  2. Thomas v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Mack v. HillMontana Supreme Court · 1903
  4. Smith v. MortonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  5. Tiger v. CokerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Mann v. WelchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953
  2. John A. Brown Co. v. ThompsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1940
  3. Whitlatch v. MaupinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API