History
  • No items yet
midpage
White v. Number One Brickman Process Ref. Co.
109 Okla. 19
Okla.
1925
Check Treatment

The parties will be referred to as in the court below. Plaintiff was in possession of certain real estate under a contract of sale and had made valuable improvements on the premises under said contract.

Upon an alleged default the defendant, over the protest of the plaintiff, took possession of the property while the buildings which plaintiff had erected thereon were locked, and were not in use. In said buildings there was stored personal property of the plaintiff, including the books, papers, and records of said refining company.

The plaintiff recovered a judgment in an action brought for forcible entry and detainer and secured the restitution of the premises. An appeal was taken to the district court of Oklahoma county and upon a trial de novo the plaintiff again prevailed. The defendant appeals from the judgment.

It is clear to us that the defendant's remedy is by a suit in equity to foreclose the plaintiff's equitable interest. Bledsoe v. Peters, 98 Okla. 41, 224 P. 288, and cases there cited. The plaintiff in error advises us in his brief that he has filed such a proceeding in the district court and has prevailed therein. Under this state of the record, according to appellant's own statement, the case is moot and the appeal should be dismissed.

We have, however, examined the record and find that there is no error therein. *Page 20 Therefore the judgment of the district court is affirmed.

By the Court. It is so ordered.

Case Details

Case Name: White v. Number One Brickman Process Ref. Co.
Court Name: Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Date Published: Feb 17, 1925
Citation: 109 Okla. 19
Docket Number: 12831
Court Abbreviation: Okla.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.