Legal Opinion

Cockrell v. Martin

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 23, 1926No. 16838PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMason, J.

Mrs. J. H. Martin commenced her action against Fred Beauman to recover on three promissory notes, each for $300, and each due more than eight months after date, and to foreclose a chattel mortgage executed and delivered by the latter to A. M. Cockrell. A. M. Cockrell was later made a party defendant, as indorser of the notes, and the action to foreclose the chattel mortgage was dismissed.

On the trial of the case, the notes sued on, which did not bear the indorsement of the county treasurer that the tax had been paid thereon in accordance with section 9608, C. O. S. 1921, were introduced in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Exch. Bank of Elk City v. National Bank of Commerce of St. LouisSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918
  2. Wommer v. WommerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  3. Hawkins v. ShieldsMississippi Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Jones v. First Nat. Bank of OktahaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Bauer v. MonroeMontana Supreme Court · 1945
  2. Alexander v. WrightSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1929
  3. Cole v. KinchSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  4. Greenwood v. PriceSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1933
  5. Skinner v. BowlanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1937

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

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

Powered by the Exa API