From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bell v. National Collection System

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Apr 27, 1954
269 P.2d 992 (Okla. 1954)

Opinion

No. 36008.

April 27, 1954.

Appeal from the Common Pleas Court of Tulsa County, Leslie W. Lisle, J.

W.R. Kerr, Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.

Wilson Leach, Tulsa, for defendants in error.


Plaintiff, a special officer serving process and other legal papers out of the court of A.W. Van Zandt, Justice of the Peace, District No. 9, Tulsa County, brought this action in the Court of Common Pleas of Tulsa County against defendants for unpaid balance of fees due her in serving process in numerous cases filed by defendant as plaintiffs in said Justice of the Peace Court. Separate demurrers of defendants to plaintiff's petition were sustained by the court and exceptions allowed. Plaintiff elected to stand on her petition, the court made an order dismissing her cause of action, and plaintiff has brought this appeal.

As stated by plaintiff in error, this is a companion case to and the same legal question are involved in Kerr, Adm'x, v. United Collection Service, Okla.Sup., 267 P.2d 611, opinion by Johnson, V.C.J. The opinion in that case is hereby adopted as the opinion in this case.

Affirmed.

HALLEY, C.J., JOHNSON, V.C.J., and CORN, DAVISON, ARNOLD, O'NEAL and BLACKBIRD, JJ., concur.

WILLIAMS, J., dissents.


Summaries of

Bell v. National Collection System

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Apr 27, 1954
269 P.2d 992 (Okla. 1954)
Case details for

Bell v. National Collection System

Case Details

Full title:BELL v. NATIONAL COLLECTION SYSTEM ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Apr 27, 1954

Citations

269 P.2d 992 (Okla. 1954)
1954 OK 123

Citing Cases

Moses v. Hoebel

The common law rule is in force in Oklahoma. Rand v. Nash, supra note 1; Kerr v. United Collection Service,…

Chamberlin v. Chamberlin

[Emphasis added.]Moses v. Hoebel, Okla., 646 P.2d 601, 604 [1982]; Bell v. National Collection System, Okla.,…