Legal Opinion

Dolezal v. Bostick

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 28, 1914No. 2998Published

Error from District Court, Noble County; W. M. Bowles, Judge. Action by Charles R. Bostick, County Attorney of Noble County, against Joseph E. Dolezal, County Clerk of said county, and Henry Ereygang and A. A. Trocon, a copartnership doing business in the name of the Midland Bridge Company, for injunction. Temporary injunction made permanent, and defendants bring error.

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

THACKER, C.

Plaintiffs in error will be designated as defendants and defendant in error as plaintiff, in accord with their respective titles in the trial court.

On August 17, 1906, after due advertisement and upon the lowest of nine bids received, the board of county commissioners of Noble county entered into a valid and binding contract in conformity with the provisions of section 4, art. 1, c. 29, Sess. Laws 1903, the same being section 7861, Comp. Laws 1909 (Rev. Laws 1910, sec. 7441), with the Midland Bridge Company, one of the defendants, whereby this defendant undertook to…

2Cases cited45 opinions

  1. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co. v. WulfSupreme Court of the United States · 1913
  2. Stewart v. Baltimore & Ohio RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1897
  3. American R. Co. of PR v. BirchSupreme Court of the United States · 1912
  4. McDonald v. NebraskaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1900
  5. Kellogg v. School District No. 10 Comanche Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1903

40 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