# Barton v. Harmon

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · July 11, 1950 · 203 Okla. 274

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9584471

## Case

- **Full name:** BARTON Et Al. v. HARMON
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** July 11, 1950
- **Citations:** 203 Okla. 274; 221 P.2d 656; 1950 OK 187; 1950 Okla. LEXIS 606
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Welch
- **Judges:** Arnold, Luttrell, Halley, Johnson, O'Neal, Welch, Corn, Gibson
- **Cited by:** 9 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9584471

## Opinion text

WELCH, J.
(dissenting). The ordinances were incorporated into the bond by reference and (on defendant’s motion to require same) complete copies were attached. Apparently during settling of the pleadings and at the trial the ordinances were considered by all as being sufficiently presented. It appears the defendants presented contentions based upon various provisions of the ordinances. _ Questions based on those contentions are important in settling the right and liabilities of the parties. I think we should consider them here, as they were considered in the trial court. It seems to me under all the circumstances the lack of formal introduction of the ordinances in evidence should not necessarily require reversal.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9584471. Public record. Not legal advice.