Legal Opinion

Tiger v. Coker

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 25, 1937No. 26775PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPi-Ielps, J.

The only statement of the case which is shown in the brief of plaintiffs in error is the following, copied therefrom :

“The instant appeal is from a purported decree of the district court of Okmulgee county, Oklahoma, and the proceedings had relating to the same.”

The plaintiffs in error then proceed to argue the case as if we were fully informed of the pleadings, the facts, ’and the issues of law. Excluding possible guesswork, surmises and conjectures, we gain no idea whatsoever from their brief concerning the nature of the case, or what the argument is about. A few brief excerpts from the…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Courtney v. BarnettSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1917
  2. Ferguson v. Union Nat. Bank of Columbus, OhioSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1909
  3. Brunson v. EmersonSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
  4. Stone v. EasterSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1923
  5. In Re First State Bank of Oklahoma CitySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1918

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Safeway Cab Co. v. McConnellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  2. Feagin v. FifeSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1946
  3. Parks v. BriggsSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1954
  4. Proctor v. SislerSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938
  5. Sparks v. CallowaySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1938

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API