Legal Opinion
W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Groseclose
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided October 15, 1935No. 25919PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PHELPS, J..This is an action wherein plaintiff in error (plaintiff below) sought to set aside conveyances of the principal defendant (grantor), to his codefendants (grantees), as being void in fraud of creditors of said principal defendant. The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the trial court sustaining demurrers to the evidence, interposed by all of the defendants.
The principal defendant, M. C. Groseclose, was indebted to the plaintiff company on a note. The plaintiff filed suit against him, for the collection of said note, on January 22, 1931. The conveyances herein involved were made…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Wimberly v. WinstockSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Japp v. Sapulpa State BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
- Oklahoma Nat. Bank v. CobbSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
- Culp v. TrentSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- First Nat. Bank of Barnsdall v. LittleSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Sampsell v. Imperial Paper & Color Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Mansell v. CarrollCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967
- Burrows v. BurrowsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
- Rucks-Brandt Construction Corp. v. SilverSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
- James P. Neill v. Robert L. Phinney, District Director of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1957
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.