City of Oklahoma v. McMaster
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma, County; before• Benj. F. Burwell, Trial Judge. STATEMENT OE EACTS.. This is an action broxight by the defendant in error, Frank McMaster, against the plaintiff in error, the city of Oklahoma City, in the district court of Oklahoma county, on the twenty-second day of September, 1899, for the recovery of the possession of two certain lots, to-wit: lots numbers one and two of block number twenty-four of the original plat of said city,…
Read the full summary
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma, County; before• Benj. F. Burwell, Trial Judge. STATEMENT OE EACTS.. This is an action broxight by the defendant in error, Frank McMaster, against the plaintiff in error, the city of Oklahoma City, in the district court of Oklahoma county, on the twenty-second day of September, 1899, for the recovery of the possession of two certain lots, to-wit: lots numbers one and two of block number twenty-four of the original plat of said city, as filed in the United States land office, to recover tbe possession of said lots, and damages for the wrongful…
1Dissent
Dissenting opinion by
PANCOAST, J.:
I cannot concur in the foregoing opinion. McMaster acquired no vested interest in the land claim ed by him by reason of his settlement and occupancy thereof ;. the land upon which he made settlement being designated by the plat and survey as a street divested him of whatever interest he may have had. (The City of Guthrie v. H. C. Beamer, 3 Okla. 652.)
A townsite settler cannot maintain an action against a board of townsite trustees appointed under and act of congress to compel a conveyance to him of property upon which he has made settlement.
The case of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- City of Guthrie v. BeamerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1895