Legal Opinion

Hall v. Turner

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided November 9, 1926No. 15809 and 16003, ConsolidatedPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRiley, J.

By the first action, No. 15809, plaintiffs in error, as plaintiffs below, sought an injunction against the defendants in error, defendants below, to prevent them from executing, issuing, and selling water bonds of the city of Shidler, in the sum of $125,-000. By the second action, No. 16003, the defendants in error, as plaintiffs, sought a writ of mandamus to compel the plaintiffs in error, as defendants below, in their official capacity as the excise board of Osage county, to vacate their order, which struck from the estimate of the town of 'Shidler, for the year 1924, the items and amount…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Goree v. CahillSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  2. Munger v. Town of WatongaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
  3. Becknell v. State Ex Rel. McRileySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. City of Shidler v. H. C. Speer & Sons Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1932
  2. Flood v. Town of ShidlerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1927
  3. Toohey v. Town of CantonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1936
  4. Livesay v. Town of Webb CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928
  5. Nipper v. Excise Bd. of Osage CountySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1934

1 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