Legal Opinion
Turk v. Kramer
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided February 12, 1929No. 18937PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DIFFENDAFFER, C.
Plaintiffs in error, who were plaintiffs below, will be herein designated as plaintiffs. George J. Kramer and wife, two of the defendants in error, who were defendants below, will be designated as defendants, and V. P. Wilson, receiver, who in his individual capacity was a defendant below, and as receiver was in-tervener, will be designated as intervener.. On or about January 19. 1926, plaintiffs, who were then the owners of a stock of merchandise and fixtures located in Sapul- pa, Okla., sold the stock' and fixtures to defendant Geo. .1. Kramer. The purchase price was not…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Etheridge v. SperrySupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Dodge v. NorlinCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1904
- Anderson v. Oklahoma Moline Plow Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
- In re First Nat. BankCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1905
- Will T. Little Co. v. Burnham, Hanna, Munger & Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Ashcraft v. ButtsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- L. E. Scott v. Allan H. Stocker, Trustee in Bankruptcy for William Harvey Smith, a Sole Trader, D/B/A Smith Office Supply, a BankruptCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967
- Howell v. BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1939
- Harris v. SchnitzerOregon Supreme Court · 1933
- Midwest Production Co. v. DoernerCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.