Roxoline Petroleum Co. v. Wilson

3 Citing cases

  1. Craig v. Roxoline Petroleum Co.

    39 P.2d 575 (Okla. 1935)   Cited 6 times

    " From said judgment an appeal was taken to this court by the Roxoline Petroleum Company, said cause appearing under the style of Roxoline Petroleum Co. v. Wilson et al., 123 Okla. 241, 253 P. 59. The following appears in the opinion of the court:

  2. Phelps v. Fina Oil & Chemical Co.

    952 F.2d 354 (10th Cir. 1991)   Cited 1 times

    Fina contends the rule in Oklahoma is that a judgment creditor may bring a creditor's bill action against assets transferred by a judgment debtor only where the judgment debtor has an actionable claim against the transferee. Roxoline Petroleum Co. v. Wilson, 123 Okl. 241, 253 P. 59, 62 (1926). Fina further contends that because the court concluded in case No. CIV 89-1823-R that Paragon has no claim against Fina for ownership or possession of the property, Phelps cannot maintain this creditor's bill action against Fina.

  3. Roxoline Petroleum Co. v. Craig

    150 Okla. 148 (Okla. 1931)   Cited 6 times

    There was error of the trial court in sustaining the motion for judgment on the pleadings, and for that error the cause must be reversed. The defendants attempt to justify their claim of title by the decision of this court in Roxoline Petroleum Co. v. Wilson, 123 Okla. 241, 253 P. 59. They contend that therein the plaintiff was adjudicated to have no interest in the real estate and that that judgment is res adjudicata. There is nothing in that case to support that contention.