extended analysis in Oklahoma

2011Such infiltration is a recognized and permissible means of investigation . . . ." Id. at 432 , 93 S.Ct. at 1643 . [22] ¶ 15 In Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 , 112 S.Ct. 1535 , 118 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992), the Supreme Court's most recent entrapment case, the Court again reaffirmed its focus on the defendant's character/predisposition as the central issue in entrapment law, but also emphasized that this factual determination must be made by evaluating the defendant before any contact with a government agent. [23] The Court held, "Where the Government has induced an individual to break the l

2011Such infiltration is a recognized and permissible means of investigation . . . ." Id. at 432 , 93 S.Ct. at 1643 . [22] ¶ 15 In Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 , 112 S.Ct. 1535 , 118 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992), the Supreme Court's most recent entrapment case, the Court again reaffirmed its focus on the defendant's character/predisposition as the central issue in entrapment law, but also emphasized that this factual determination must be made by evaluating the defendant before any contact with a government agent. [23] The Court held, "Where the Government has induced an individual to break the l

2011Such infiltration is a recognized and permissible means of investigation . . . ." Id. at 432 , 93 S.Ct. at 1643 . [22] ¶ 15 In Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 , 112 S.Ct. 1535 , 118 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992), the Supreme Court's most recent entrapment case, the Court again reaffirmed its focus on the defendant's character/predisposition as the central issue in entrapment law, but also emphasized that this factual determination must be made by evaluating the defendant before any contact with a government agent. [23] The Court held, "Where the Government has induced an individual to break the l

2011Such infiltration is a recognized and permissible means of investigation . . . ." Id. at 432 , 93 S.Ct. at 1643 . [22] ¶ 15 In Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 , 112 S.Ct. 1535 , 118 L.Ed.2d 174 (1992), the Supreme Court's most recent entrapment case, the Court again reaffirmed its focus on the defendant's character/predisposition as the central issue in entrapment law, but also emphasized that this factual determination must be made by evaluating the defendant before any contact with a government agent. [23] The Court held, "Where the Government has induced an individual to break the l

1999Shepherd & Son v. Hood, 185 Okla. 635 , 95 P.2d 619 (1939), the court extended the rule in the Heinz case — the rule that included “a fixed allowance for living expenses while on the road” as part of the employee’s wages — to cases “where the traveling expenses are not fixed and agreed upon in the contract of employment.” Id. at 636 , 95 P.2d at 621 .

1999Shepherd & Son v. Hood, 185 Okla. 635 , 95 P.2d 619 (1939), the court extended the rule in the Heinz case — the rule that included “a fixed allowance for living expenses while on the road” as part of the employee’s wages — to cases “where the traveling expenses are not fixed and agreed upon in the contract of employment.” Id. at 636 , 95 P.2d at 621 .

1999Shepherd & Son v. Hood, 185 Okla. 635 , 95 P.2d 619 (1939), the court extended the rule in the Heinz case — the rule that included “a fixed allowance for living expenses while on the road” as part of the employee’s wages — to cases “where the traveling expenses are not fixed and agreed upon in the contract of employment.” Id. at 636 , 95 P.2d at 621 .

1964And we see no valid reason — despite decisions reaching a contrary result, including the very recent one in Esborg v. Bailey Drug Co., (Wash.) 378 P.2d 298 — -for not applying to substances, manufactured for use on the body’s exterior, the same rule usually applied to food, medicine, bottled drinks, and other products prepared for internal use, or bodily consumption.

1964And we see no valid reason — despite decisions reaching a contrary result, including the very recent one in Esborg v. Bailey Drug Co., (Wash.) 378 P.2d 298 — for not applying to substances, manufactured for use on the body's exterior, the same rule usually applied to food, medicine, bottled drinks, and other products prepared for internal use, or bodily consumption.

1956In Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Choctaw Gas Co., 205 Okl. 255 , 236 P.2d 970, 972 , this court reversed Order No. 21546, and held that such attempted forcing of Natural to sell its gas to Choctaw was “beyond the Commission’s power as taking one company’s property to give to the other.” (For a more detailed statement of the factual background of this controversy, see the cited opinion).

1956In Oklahoma Natural Gas Co. v. Choctaw Gas Co., 205 Okl. 255 , 236 P.2d 970, 972 , this court reversed Order No. 21546, and held that such attempted forcing of Natural to sell its gas to Choctaw was “beyond the Commission’s power as taking one company’s property to give to the other.” (For a more detailed statement of the factual background of this controversy, see the cited opinion).

1954Co., 254 N.Y. 81 , 171 N.E. 914 .

1954Co., 254 N.Y. 81 , 171 N.E. 914 .

1923The question is one of induction, and the larger the number of consistent facts the more complete the induction is.” Por a more complete and extended analysis of this rule of evidence, see People v. Rice, supra, and cases there cited. *376 The record here shows that this class of evidence introduced in this case could, and doubtless would, be introduced at a retrial on the merits.

1907In fact, it is sufficient to establish the guilt of the defendant, as charged in the information, beyond a reasonable doubt, and would have justified, not only the forfeiture ■of the charter, but the infliction of a fine upon the parties guilty of the abuses.” In Illinois Health University v. People, 166 Ill. 171 , 46 N. E. 740 , the supreme court of Illinois, in discussing this question, said: “It is not consistent with the public policy of a state which enacts stringent laws for the preservation of the public health, and for the protection of its people from quacks and ignorant pretenders to

1907In fact, it is sufficient to establish the guilt of the defendant, as charged in the information, beyond a reasonable doubt, and would have justified, not only the forfeiture ■of the charter, but the infliction of a fine upon the parties guilty of the abuses.” In Illinois Health University v. People, 166 Ill. 171 , 46 N. E. 740 , the supreme court of Illinois, in discussing this question, said: “It is not consistent with the public policy of a state which enacts stringent laws for the preservation of the public health, and for the protection of its people from quacks and ignorant pretenders to