Love v. Schmidt
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Error from District Court of Kingfisher County; A. H. Huston, Judge. Action by Henry J. Schmidt against J. P. Love and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Citing: Walters v. Bailiff (Okla.) 61 Pac. 1070; Yanlc v. Bordeau (Mont.) 58 Pac. 42; Banning v. Morleau (Cal.) 32 Pac. 772; Lake v. Morris, 30 Conn. 201.
1Opinion of the CourtTurner, J.
This is an action in replevin commenced by Henry J. Schmidt,- defendant in error, before a justice of the peace in Kingfisher county to recover from J. P. Love, sheriff, and his deputy, plaintiffs in error, 117% bushels of wheat. There was trial to a jury and judgment for plaintiff, from which de fendants appealed to the district court. There on trial anew to the court plaintiff again recovered judgment and defendants bring the case here.
Love and his deputy claim right to possession of the wheat by virtue of an execution levied thereon by creditors of Henry F. Schmidt. Schmidt claims title…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Brown v. O'NealCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Walters v. RatliffSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1900
- Brown v. GrahamIllinois Supreme Court · 1860
- Lake v. MorrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861
- Yank v. BordeauxMontana Supreme Court · 1899
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Moores v. TomlinsonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1916
- Claypool v. Malta Standard GarageMontana Supreme Court · 1934
- Williams v. CookSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1953