Legal Opinion

Tom-Pah-Pe v. Roddy

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 8, 1927No. 17614PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MASON, Y. C. J.

The defendant in error, Ida Roddy, as plaintiff, commenced this action to recover $l,51i5.40, with interest and attorney’s fee, om a note executed on the 28th day of July, 1924, by the plaintiff in error, Rose Pratt, and to foreclose a real estate mortgage given to secure the same.

The plaintiff alleged that said note was executed and delivered to one Bright Rod-dy and that thereafter, and before maturity, the plaintiff purchased said note from him on the 1st day of August, 1924, for a valuable consideration, in due course and in good faith. Defendant’s demurrer to plaintiff’s…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Goshen National Bank v. BinghamNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  2. Mayers v. McRimmon.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1906
  3. Ireland v. ScharpenbergWashington Supreme Court · 1909
  4. Carter v. ButlerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1915
  5. First National Bank v. McCulloughOregon Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. May v. City Nat. Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953
  2. Conrad v. JamesSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
  3. Bennett v. StewartSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API