Legal Opinion

Pearson v. Mullins

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided March 6, 1962No. 39276PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

IRWIN, Justice.

M. R. Pearson, plaintiff in error, commenced this action against Hardin M. Lovelace and Betty Jean Lovelace, husband and wife, and J. E. Mullins to cancel a real estate mortgage on certain property in Purcell, Oklahoma, and to quiet his title thereto. The Lovelaces did not appear and were declared to be in default. Defendant Mullins filed an answer in the form of a general denial and a cross-petition in which he alleged the execution and delivery of a note in the sum of $2725.00, secured by a mortgage on the property involved, both instruments being executed by the Lovelaces,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Jones v. MooreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1959
  2. Harth v. PollockOregon Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Woods v. FaurotSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1904
  4. Burnham v. EschlerUtah Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Pavlovitch v. WommackSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1952

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lyman Grazing Association v. SmithUtah Supreme Court · 1970
  2. Lyman Grazing Association v. SmithUtah Supreme Court · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API