McDonald v. Carpenter
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before Jno. H. Burford, Trial -Judge. STATEMENT OE FACTS . In this case, brought before a justice of the peace, the bill of particulars averred an indebtedness on account of work and labor performed.
Read the full summary
Error from the District Court of Oklahoma County; before Jno. H. Burford, Trial -Judge. STATEMENT OE FACTS . In this case, brought before a justice of the peace, the bill of particulars averred an indebtedness on account of work and labor performed. Verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff, and an appeal taken to the district court, where the case was again tried to a jury, and verdict again for plaintiff, and the amount of his recovery assessed at the sum of $60.80. ' Thereafter motion for new trial alleged, that (1,) the verdict was not sustained by sufficient evidence, was…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion of the court by
MoAtee, J.:
Error is urged in plaintiff in error’s brief, upon the grounds that, (1,) the verdict of the jury was for $60.80, without any finding that the claim was for work and labor, or that any part was for personal services, or what part was for the use of teams which the testimony showed had been emploj^ed in conjunction with the personal services, and (2), that the court rendered judgment for the full sum of $60.80 for work, labor and services; and fen dollars as costs for attorneys.
It is provided in chapter 51, sectional, of the Statutes of 1895, that:
“In all…
2Cited by9 opinions
- Stanard v. Sampson Et Ux.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
- Citizens' State Bank of Ft. Gibson v. StrahanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
- Render v. LillardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1916
- Tirey v. DarnealSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Stem v. AdamsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.