De Groff v. Carhart
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Commissioners’ Opinion, Division No. 1. Error from District Court, Tulsa County; 2. I. ,T. Holt, Judge. Action by E. R Carhart et al. against E. N. DeGroff. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
RAY, C.
Plaintiffs maintained a garage in connection with their sales agency for the Willys-Knight automobile in Tulsa, and the defendant owned a Willys-Knight car. He left the car with Hobart L. Baugus, the head repair man of the garage connected with Cosden & Company’s refinery, to be “tuned up.” Baugus took the car out on a joy ride and wrecked it. It was towed into plaintiffs’ garage and rebuilt. After the car was put in running order the defendant got possession of it without plaintiffs’ consent, and left them with an unpaid bill of $1,055.53, and plaintiffs commenced this…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Nettles v. CarsonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Greer v. BirdSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
3Cited by8 opinions
- Moral Insurance Company v. CookseySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1955
- Norton-Johnson Buick Co. v. LindleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Equitable Royalty Corp. v. State Ex Rel. Commissioners of the Land OfficeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1960
- United Tire & Investment Co. v. MaxwellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1950
- Britton v. Johnson-Mcquity Motor Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.