Strahan v. De Soto Paint Mfg. Co.

2 Citing cases

  1. McKee v. Jolly

    178 P. 656 (Okla. 1919)   Cited 9 times

    he defendant's objection a census card of Obie Harjo, showing the names of plaintiff's grantors, their relationship to the allottee, and that all of said persons whose names appeared on the card were full blood Creek Indians. Counsel for defendant objected to the admission of this exhibit, but did not at the trial, nor does he here, contend that the census card was not competent to show the degree of blood of the allottee and his heirs, but rests his objection on the ground that there was no allegation in the pleadings authorizing the plaintiff to make proof that said allottee and his heirs were full-blood Indians. It is obvious that there was no error in this ruling since we have already hold that the court did not err in permitting the amendments by interlineation and that the petition was sufficient as against the objection to the introduction of evidence. Moreover, no exception was saved, which precludes defendant from urging the alleged error in this court as ground for reversal. Strahan v. De Soto Paint Mfg. Co., 55 Okla. 444, 154 P. 1128. Upon an examination of the entire record, it appears that all the assignments of error are directed to irregularities in the procedure, and not to the merits of the controversy.

  2. Holland Banking Co. v. Dicks

    67 Okla. 228 (Okla. 1917)   Cited 40 times
    In Holland Banking Company v. Dicks, 67 Okla. 228, 170 P. 253 (1917), this court laid down the rule that an attorney's fee cannot be taxed by the court without evidence as to the value of such fee.

    "Errors alleged to have occurred at the trial in the lower court, unless the same are excepted to, will not be considered on review in this court." Strahan v. De Soto Paint Mfg. Co., 55 Okla. 444, 154 P. 1128. However, had the refusal of the court to entertain the motion for judgment non obstante veredicto been excepted to, by reason of the failure of the plaintiff to demur to the evidence or to ask for an instructed verdict in its favor, the evidence in this case, as previously said, is not before this court, and without having the evidence before us we could not intelligently review the action of the court on such motion, and consequently would decline to consider the same.