Stevirmac Oil & Gas Co. v. Dittman
Supreme Court of the United States
ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE' EASTERN DISTRICT OF OKLAHOMA. The case is stated in the opinion. in support of this court’s jurisdiction, cited: Kendall v. American Automatic Loom Co., 198 U. S. 477; Merriam v. Saalfield, 241 U. S. 26; Stewart v. Ramsay, 242 U. S. 128; and St. Louis Cotton Comp. Co. v. American Cotton Co., 125 Fed. Rep. 196.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Day
On October 4, 1913, the defendants in error brought suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma against The Stevirmac Oil & Gas Company and Virgil Hicks to recover a money judgment. Process was issued naming November 3, 1913, as answer date. On October 15, 1913, the marshal made return certifying that he had delivered a copy of the summons to Virgil Hicks, Treas., in person, and that the other defendant' named was not serveci. On November 25, 1913, the court ordered the marshal to amend the return to conform to the facts, and thereupon the marshal amended his…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Mansfield, Coldwater & Lake Michigan Railway Co. v. SwanSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- In Re LennonSupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Carey v. Houston & Texas Central Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Empire State-Idaho Mining & Developing Co. v. HanleySupreme Court of the United States · 1907
3Cited by24 opinions
- Swift & Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Pettis v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
- Smith v. AppleSupreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Mohonk Realty Corporation v. Wise Shoe StoresCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- Vann v. Union Central Life Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1920
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.