Fitch v. Braddock
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion hy
MMXEY, C.
Plaintiff in error in his brief urges the first error assigned and insists that the demurrer to the evidence should have been sustained upon the grounds that the plaintiffs were not entitled to maintain this action, for the reason that it was transacting business under a fictitious name or names, or name not disclosing the names of all of its members, in compliance with the provisions! of the statutes on that subject. It is admitted that the plaintiff in error, Fitch, had no pleadings setting up this defense, and did not raise it in any .other way until he raised it hy…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- A. W. Swope & Son v. Burnham, Hanna, Munger & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1898
- Oklahoma Fire Ins. Co. v. WagesterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1913
- Treese v. ShoemakerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1921
- W. G. Blanchard & Co. v. EzellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1910
- Baker v. L. C. Van Ness & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Gallafent v. TuckerIdaho Supreme Court · 1929
- Cantrell v. McLemoreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1926
- Shelton v. TapleySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1958
- Simmons v. MaxeySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1925
- Oklahoma State Bank of OcheLata v. WardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.