Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Oklahoma opinions name it 2 courts 1899–1943 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Oklahoma courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Oklahoma. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Romaine
green
2 sentences1943In the case of State v. Romaine, 58 Iowa 46 , 11 N.W. 721 , that court said: 'It appears to us that the true rule adduced from the authorities, as well as from principle, is that a child born in wedlock, whether begotten before or after marriage, is presumed to be the child of the husband, but that such presumption may be rebutted by strong, satisfactory, and conclusive evidence that the husband did not have access to the mother of the child when it was begotten. . . . 1943In the case of State v. Romaine, 58 Iowa 46 , 11 N.W. 721 , that court said: 'It appears to us that the true rule adduced from the authorities, as well as from principle, is that a child born in wedlock, whether begotten before or after marriage, is presumed to be the child of the husband, but that such presumption may be rebutted by strong, satisfactory, and conclusive evidence that the husband did not have access to the mother of the child when it was begotten. . . . | 3 | 1899–1943 |
Price v. State
green
1 sentence1913Cr. 358 , 98 Pac. 447 , we think, is probably the safer rule. | 1 | 1913–1913 |
Ashcraft v. De Armond
green
1 sentence1908It is a safer rule to require his heirs and those acting for them to take prompt steps to have the deed set aside and the parties placed in statu quo before the property is conveyed to other parties and while the facts are capable of full investigation, than to subject a remote grantee to maintain the integrity of his title by rebutting the allegations of incapacity of any one in the line of grantors.” Another interesting case where the same subject is discussed is Ashcraft v. De Armond et al., 44 Iowa, 229 , in which case the person against whom the action was brought had knowledge of the uns | 1 | 1908–1908 |
Wabash Railway Co. v. Savage
neutral
1 sentence1903Co. v. Savage, 9 N. E. 85 ; Rice v. Manford, 11 N. E. 283 .) But in our opinion the doctrine announced by the Kansas court is the better and safer rule to follow. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Rice v. Manford
neutral
1 sentence1903Co. v. Savage, 9 N. E. 85 ; Rice v. Manford, 11 N. E. 283 .) But in our opinion the doctrine announced by the Kansas court is the better and safer rule to follow. | 1 | 1903–1903 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.