Revel et al. v. Pruitt

3 Citing cases

  1. Warren v. De Long

    57 Nev. 131 (Nev. 1936)   Cited 2 times

    The issue as to the emancipation of the children does not properly belong in this case, for the reason that the cattle were not acquired by them by reason of labor and services, but by gift, but we believe it best to submit some law to the court bearing on the subject. Woods v. James (Cal.), 114 P. 587; Mathias v. Tingey (Utah), 118 P. 781; Officer v. Swindlehurse (Mont.), 108 P. 583; Frauenthal v. Bank of El Paso (Ark.), 44 A.L.R. 871; 46 C.J. 1285; Burdsall v. Waggoner, 4 Colo. 261; Wheeler v. St. J. W.R. Co., supra; Revel v. Pruitt (Okla.), 142 P. 1020; Mathews v. Fields, 77 S.E. 11; Sweet v. Crane (Okla.), 134 P. 1112. The recordation of the JHG brand and the awarding thereof by the state board of stock commissioners constitute prima-facie evidence of ownership.

  2. Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Ins. Co. v. First Nat. Bank

    292 P. 829 (Okla. 1930)   Cited 7 times
    In Fidelity-Phoenix Fire Ins. Co. v. First National Bank, 145 Okla. 289, 292 P. 829, it was held that an application to disqualify a trial judge is addressed to the court's discretion, and the applicant must show clear abuse of the discretion to justify the disqualification.

    "It is a well-established principle of pleading that there need be no direct allegation of a fact if the same otherwise sufficiently appears, or of a fact which is necessarily implied from other averments in the petition." Revel v. Pruitt, 42 Okla. 696, 142 P. 1019. "Pleadings attacked by demurrer should be liberally construed in favor of the pleader where material allegations are merely defectively stated and not entirely omitted."

  3. First Nat. Bank of Ada v. Elam

    126 Okla. 93 (Okla. 1927)   Cited 18 times
    In First National Bank of Ada v. Elam, 126 Okla. 93, 258 P. 892, 900 (1927), it is made clear that the "good faith" defense applies to a mortgagee's refusal to accept a tendered payment in full.

    " In the case of Revel v. Pruitt, 42 Okla. 696, 142 P. 1019, it is said: "It is a well-established principle of pleading that there need be no direct allegation of a fact if the same otherwise sufficiently appears, or of a fact which is necessarily implied from other averments in the petition."