Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Mocabee

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided January 28, 1893PublishedCited by 16 opinions

Error to the District Court of Canadian Coimty, Hon. A. J. Seay, Judge.

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

CLARK, J.

On the 20th day of March, 1891, the plaintiff in error, Johnson, commenced an action of replevin against the defendant, Mocabee, to recover the possession of seven horses and one mule. The defendant answered, setting up as a defense, that said live stock was destrained while trespassing and doing damage on his premises, and that he held the same for the purpose of securing the payment of damage done by said stock and the costs of the keeping of said stock and of appraising the damages.

To the answer, the plaintiff demurred on the ground that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Stocking v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1855
  2. State ex rel. Henderson v. County CourtSupreme Court of Missouri · 1872
  3. State ex rel. Johnson v. HitchcockSupreme Court of Kansas · 1862

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Chickasha Cotton Oil Co. v. Lamb & TynerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1911
  2. Enyart v. OrrSupreme Court of Colorado · 1925
  3. Blankenship v. DeckerMontana Supreme Court · 1906
  4. Hudgins v. FosterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  5. Johnson v. Homestead-Iron Dyke Mines Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1920

11 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