Opinion

State Ex Rel. Roth v. Waterfield

  • 167 Okla. 209
  • 29 P.2d 24
  • 1933 OK 546
  • 1933 Okla. LEXIS 840
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Oct 17, 1933
Status
Published
Author
Osborn
On the bench
AIc-XEILL, Andrews, Bayless, Busby, Cullison, McNEILL, Osborn, Riley, Swindall, Welch, Wind
Cited by
33 cases
Authority
More cited than 0.4%

The opinion

OSBORN, J.

(dissenting). In dissenting from the majority opinion on rehearing in the above cause, I call attention to my dissenting opinion filed October 17, 1933, in the companion case of State ex rel. Osage County Savings

&

Loan Ass’n v. Worten, District Judge, 167 Okla. 187 , 29 P. (2d) 1 , decided at the same time as the original decision in the above case, which dissenting opinion expresses my views on this important subject.

After carefully reading the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States delivered by Chief Justice Hughes in the case of Home Building

&

Loan Association v. Blaisdell et al., 54 S. Ct. 231 , 78 L. Ed. — (Minn.) 249 N. W. 334 , I remain of the opinion that when the entire act under consideration by this court is construed as set forth in my prior dissenting opinion, said act was violative of no provision of the state or federal Constitutions.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.