Legal Opinion
Papoose Oil Co. v. Swindler
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided March 27, 1923No. 13881PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCochran, J.
This action was commenced by the defendants in error, plaintiffs below, against the plaintiff in error, defendant below, for the cancellation of certain oil and gas leases held by the defendant.
The plaintiffs insist that the appeal of the defendant should be dismissed. because of failure to comply with rule 26 of this court (47 Okla. x). It is our opinion that the brief filed by the defendant is substantially in compliance with rule 26, and where the specifications contained in the brief clearly and concisely state the errors complained of, and where such errors were included in…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- Von Baumbach v. Sargent Land Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Kolachny v. GalbreathSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- United States v. GratiotSupreme Court of the United States · 1840
- United States v. Biwabik Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Frank Oil Co. v. Belleview Gas & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Jones v. Prairie Oil & Gas Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1927
- Dow v. WorleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. WardCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1940
- Simmons v. HarrisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- State v. ShamblinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.