Parks v. Briggs

4 Citing cases

  1. Fink v. Sheridan Bank of Lawton, Oklahoma

    259 F. Supp. 899 (W.D. Okla. 1966)   Cited 2 times

    In these circumstances and under these findings it is quite clear that the divorce court had not only the authority but the duty to enter the amendment to the divorce decree so that the record correctly reflected his decision in the case. Taliaferro v. Bates (1927), 123 Okl. 59, 252 P. 845; Peoples Electric Co-op v. Broughton (1942), 191 Okl. 229, 127 P.2d 850; Adamson v. Brady (1947), 199 Okl. 55, 182 P.2d 748; Mabry v. Baird (1950), 203 Okl. 212, 219 P.2d 234; Hawks v. McCormack (1937), 180 Okl. 569, 71 P.2d 724; Parks v. Briggs (Okl. 1954), 268 P.2d 283; Woodmansee v. Woodmansee (1929), 137 Okl. 112, 278 P. 278.         The plaintiff claims herein that the Bank, the Spragues, Westgate (owned by the Spragues) and Crane conspired to deprive him of his equity or rights in 13 1/2 shares of Westgate stock and a promissory note from Westgate to him by criminal or unlawful means.

  2. Depuy v. Hoeme

    1989 OK 42 (Okla. 1989)   Cited 38 times
    In Depuy v. Hoeme, 775 P.2d 1339 (Okla. 1989), the Oklahoma Supreme Court concluded that a ruling pronounced by a judge at a hearing, transcribed by a court reporter, and memorialized in a "bench docket entry" could not be afforded preclusive effect because the ruling was not set forth in an order signed by the judge.

    It is the duty of a trial court, in a proper evidentiary proceeding and upon sufficient proof, to cause to be entered orders and judgments which have failed to be recorded. Cf. Feagin v. Fife, 198 Okla. 57, 175 P.2d 81, 84 [1946]; Parks v. Briggs, Okla., 268 P.2d 283, 284-285 [1954]. An adversary proceeding to determine the sweep of the 1977 decision is also essential to meet the applicable due process standards.

  3. Kizzire v. Sarkeys

    361 P.2d 1082 (Okla. 1961)   Cited 6 times
    In Kizzire v. Sarkeys, Okla., 361 P.2d 1082, we said that the statute of limitations is an affirmative defense and the burden of producing evidence to make its application clear rests upon the party relying thereon.

    Here the illegal charges included were neither trivial nor unintentional. Upon the authority of the following cases, we hold the resale deed to the defendant in error to be void. Carman v. McMahan, 198 Okla. 367, 178 P.2d 626; Dyer v. Dalton, 197 Okla. 601, 174 P.2d 252; Parks v. Briggs, Okla., 268 P.2d 283; House v. Mainka, 196 Okla. 174, 163 P.2d 225; Allgood v. Wetsel, Okla., 275 P.2d 317; Harris v. Dungan, 199 Okla. 350, 185 P.2d 949; Lind v. McKinley, supra; Reynolds v. Clemmens, 199 Okla. 153, 184 P.2d 758; Rogers v. Sheppard, 200 Okla. 203, 192 P.2d 643; Sarkeys v. Evans, 197 Okla. 304, 170 P.2d 229; Lawrence v. Ayres, supra; Smith v. Barry, 200 Okla. 619, 198 P.2d 400; Whitehead v. Garrett, 199 Okla. 278, 185 P.2d 686; Williamson v. Hart, 199 Okla. 328, 186 P.2d 71; Chapman v. Calhoun, 204 Okla. 63, 226 P.2d 974; Schultz v. Evans, 204 Okla. 209, 228 P.2d 626; North v. Kidd, 204 Okla. 623, 232 P.2d 931; Anderson v. Hill, 205 Okla. 561, 239 P.2d 1016; Sarkeys v. Simpson, 206 Okla. 425, 244 P.2d 311; Boone v. Claxton, supra; Parks v. Replogle, 207 Okla. 536, 251 P.2d 794; Jenkins v. Frederick, 208 Okla. 583, 257 P.2d 1058, and Young v. Boswell, 191 Okla. 680, 134 P.2d 592. This cause is reversed and remanded with directions to enter judgment for the plaintiffs in error herein upon

  4. Parks v. Hughes

    312 P.2d 435 (Okla. 1957)   Cited 7 times
    In Parks the court assumed original jurisdiction in cause Okla.Sup.Ct. No. 37,409 to enforce the mandate issued in cause Okla.Sup.Ct. No. 34,968.

    October 19, 1950, upon a trial before respondent herein, the Honorable Kenneth Hughes, judgment was rendered in favor of the defendant, R.L. Briggs and against Oscar Lonnie Parks, quieting title to the land in R.L. Briggs and holding his possession of the land as rightful and quieting his title thereto. Under this judgment the accounting prayed for by the petitioner here, was unnecessary. From that judgment Oscar Lonnie Parks appealed to this Court, being case No. 34,968 in this Court, and on February 9, 1954, this Court reversed the judgment of the trial court and remanded the case to the District Court with directions, Parks v. Briggs, Okla., 268 P.2d 283. April 8, 1954, mandate was issued whereby the respondent was commanded: "* * * to cause such reversal with directions to show of record in your court and to issue such process and take such other and further action as may be in accord with right and justice and said opinion."