Legal Opinion

Coyle and Smith v. Baum

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided July 27, 1895PublishedCited by 17 opinions

Jirror from the District Court of Logan County.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Burford, J.:

This was an action brought by Joe Baum against Coyle & Smith, to recover damage alleged to have resulted to plaintiff’s horses by feeding oats containing castor beans, which he had purchased from the defendants. There was a trial by jury and verdict for plaintiff for five hundred and seventy dollars. The jury also returned special findings of fact. Motion for new trial was made and overruled, and judgment rendered on the verdict. The defendants bring the case here upon a petition in error. The amended petition is as follows:

“Joe Baum,…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Mallow v. HindeSupreme Court of the United States · 1827
  2. Smith v. BollesSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  3. White v. . MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
  4. Fairbank Canning Co. v. . MetzgerNew York Court of Appeals · 1890
  5. Howard & Ryckman v. HoeyNew York Supreme Court · 1840

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

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Abdallah, Inc. v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  2. Poovey v. International Sugar Feed No. Two Co.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1926
  3. Filson v. the Territory of OklahomaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1901
  4. Walden v. WheelerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1913
  5. Wright v. HoweUtah Supreme Court · 1915

12 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