Legal Opinion

Mid-Continent Supply Co., a Corporation v. Atkins & Potter Drilling Corp., a Corporation T. E. Atkins and W. L. Potter

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided January 30, 1956No. 5160_1PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRATTON, Circuit Judge.

Invoking federal jurisdiction on the ground of diversity of citizenship with the requisite amount involved, Mid-Continent Supply Co. instituted this action against Atkins & Potter Drilling Corporation, T. E. Atkins, and W. L. Potter. The purpose of the action was to recover personal judgment upon five promissory notes, each for the sum of $4,291.24. The notes were executed by the drilling corporation as principal, were endorsed by the two individuals, and were payable to the order of the supply company. The defendants admitted the execution and endorsement of the notes.…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Hanson v. ManleySupreme Court of Iowa · 1887
  2. California National Bank v. GintyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Kortlander v. ElstonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1892
  4. Wills v. FullerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915
  5. First Nat. Bank of Sallisaw v. BallardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1914

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Mountain Iron & Supply Co. v. JonesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1968
  2. State Bank of Streeter v. NesterNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  3. Collins v. Kingsberry Homes Corp.District Court, N.D. Alabama · 1963
  4. Koehring Co. v. United States ex rel. Hoover Equipment Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1962
  5. Koehring Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1962

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