TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Smith v. Aronoff

Smith v. Aronoff.

Smith v. Aronoff, 1937 OK 234, 67 P.2d 447
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
April 6, 1937
Docket
No. 27546.
Judges
Osborn, Riley, Corn, Gibson
Citations
67 P.2d 4471937 OK 234179 Okla. 5601937 Okla. LEXIS 336

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This is an action on account. Judgment wag for the plaintiff. Plaintiff introduced as his case certain depositions to prove his account.

The sole issue argued in the defendant’s brief is that the exhibits of depositions constituting the account were never properly identified. No contest was raised as to the payment or otherwise in the trial court. The account was not specifically denied, and it is not urged here that the exhibits are incorrect. No defense is presented. "We have held that where a motion to dismiss has been filed which challenges the appeal on the ground that it is without merit and for delay only, the same will be dismissed if an examination of plaintiff in error’s brief shows that there is no contest. The appeal is dismissed, and the judgment, of the trial court affirmed.

OSBORN, C. J., and RILEY, -WELCH, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1940: 11942: 11944: 11950: 11951: 119402026peak 1940 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Atkinson v. Shaffer1940 OK 232, 102 P.2d 943
  2. Jones v. Bob Cason Motor Co.1942 OK 326, 129 P.2d 840
  3. Stone v. Oklahoma City ex rel. Lane1944 OK 344, 154 P.2d 68
  4. Van Pelt v. Grant1950 OK 195, 220 P.2d 242
  5. Baker v. Marcus1951 OK 54, 228 P.2d 633

Most recent

  1. Baker v. Marcus1951 OK 54, 228 P.2d 633
  2. Van Pelt v. Grant1950 OK 195, 220 P.2d 242
  3. Stone v. Oklahoma City ex rel. Lane1944 OK 344, 154 P.2d 68
  4. Jones v. Bob Cason Motor Co.1942 OK 326, 129 P.2d 840
  5. Atkinson v. Shaffer1940 OK 232, 102 P.2d 943

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.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list