Hoteyabi v. Vaughn
HOTEYABI Et Al. v. VAUGHN Et Al.
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by ROBERTSON, C This case involves the consideration of the identical question decided by this court in the case of Hancock et al. v. Mutual Trust Company et al., decided July 13, 1909, and reported in 24
Okla. 391 , 103 Pac. 566 . The opinion in that case by Mr. Justice Dunn is conclusive as to the issue herein, and we hereby adopt and promulgate the opinion in that case as and for the opinion in this case. See, also, the recent case of J.
S. Mullen et al. v. United States, 224 U. S. 448, 32 Sup. Ct. 494, 56 L. Ed. --, decided by the Supreme Court of the United States April 15, 1912, which is also conclusive as to the issues herein.
For the reason assigned, the judgment of the district court of Garvin county should be affirmed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.