Legal Opinion

Childress v. Hinch

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 17, 1933No. 20662PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CÜLLISON. V. C. J.

Plaintiff, M. W. Hinch, filed suit against Fred J. Childress and Alf G. Heggem, seeking to recover $3,-000, which amount plaintiff alleged was due under the terms and conditions of a certain contract entered into between plaintiff and defendants.

Defendants answered by general denial, except sueb matters as were specifically admitted. Defendants admit the execution of the contract and the assignment attached «o plaintiff’s petition as exhibits. And further allege that there was in fact no sale of said property as said term was used and understood by the parties to said…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Van Allen v. AssessorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
  2. Gibbons v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1890
  3. Minot v. Philadelphia, Wilmington & Baltimore RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  4. Iowa v. McFarlandSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
  5. People's Nat. Bank v. Board of Com'rs of Kingfisher CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In the Matter of American Magnesium Company, Debtor. Ozark-Mahoning Company v. American Magnesium Company, DebtorCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1974
  2. Wilhelm v. Consolidated Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1936
  3. Billingslea v. BillingsleaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1944
  4. Gill v. GiacomoSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1971
  5. Erskine v. FennDistrict Court, D. Arizona · 2021

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

Powered by the Exa API