Legal Opinion
Security Nat. Bank v. Bohnefeld
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Decided March 20, 1928No. 17749PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLester, J.
The parties to this appeal occupy the same position as in the district court, and will be referred to as plaintiff and defendant.
The plaintiff brought an action for judgment against the defendant on a certain promissory note in the sum of $10,000 with interest thereon at the rate of 5 per cent, and certain attorney’s fees.
Said note was dated September 16, 1923, and became due 90 days thereafter, and made payable to the Liberty National Bank of Tulsa, Okla. _
The plaintiff alleged that on the 5th day of November, 1923, the Liberty National JB'ank sold to the plaintiff said note for a valuable…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Dowe v. SchuttNew York Supreme Court · 1846
- State Bank of Moore v. ForsythMontana Supreme Court · 1910
- Vallely v. DevaneyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1923
- Earl v. . PeckNew York Court of Appeals · 1876
- Matlock v. ScheuermanOregon Supreme Court · 1908
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Fipps v. StidhamSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Allen v. Oklahoma State Bank of EnidSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
- Haffner v. First Nat. Bank of SeilingSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
- Sturm v. American Bank & Trust Co. of ArdmoreSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1935
- Acme Finance Co. v. ZapffeWashington Supreme Court · 1931
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.