Poole v. Peoria Cordage Co.
Court Of Appeals Of Indian Territory
Error to the United States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territory; before Justice Wm. R.Lawrence, May 27, 1905. Action by the Peoria Cordage Company against C. W. Poole and another, doing business under the firm name of the Chelsea Furniture & Implement Company. There was a judgment refusing to vacate a default judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
Read the full summary
Error to the United States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territory; before Justice Wm. R.Lawrence, May 27, 1905. Action by the Peoria Cordage Company against C. W. Poole and another, doing business under the firm name of the Chelsea Furniture & Implement Company. There was a judgment refusing to vacate a default judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. On March 16, 1905, the plaintiff (appellee) filed its complaint, and alleged that on June 13, 1904, the defendants (appellant) under the firm name of Chelsea Furniture & Implement Company, became indebted to the…
1Opinion of the CourtTownsend, J.
(after stating the facts). The plaintiffs in error have filed six assignments of error, as follows: "(1) It appeared from the record and proceedings that said C. W. Poole has a meritorious defense to said action and a reasonable excuse for having suffered the default. (2) Because it was 'shown that said default was the result of mistake and -misunderstanding between attorney and defendant as to the fact of employment to defend said suit. (3) The plaintiff’s complaint is insufficient to support the judgment. (4) Plaintiff’s complaint is not verified as required by statute. (5) Plaintiff did…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Bigler v. BakerNebraska Supreme Court · 1894
- Dugan v. CuretonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1837
- Hanna v. MorrowSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1884
- Mann v. CorriganSupreme Court of Kansas · 1882
- Merritt v. PutnamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1862
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.