Elledge v. Cornelius, Civ. No. 3459.
| Decision Date | 16 December 1947 |
| Docket Number | Civ. No. 3459. |
| Citation | Elledge v. Cornelius, 86 F.Supp. 766 (W.D. Okla. 1947) |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Western District of Oklahoma |
| Parties | ELLEDGE v. CORNELIUS. |
Earl Goad, T. H. Ottesen, Oklahoma City, Okl., for plaintiff.
Grigsby & Eberle, Oklahoma City, Okl., for defendant.
On this the 16th day of December, 1947, a regular court day of the January 1947 term of this Court, the above styled and numbered cause came on for trial before the Court, without a jury, a jury having heretofore been waived by agreement of the parties; and after the introduction of evidence by the parties in support of their respective claims and defenses said cause is submitted, and after a careful consideration of the evidence introduced and all other matters pertinent to this action, the Court now makes its specific findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Findings of Fact.
The Court finds that this suit was commenced by the plaintiff, a citizen of the State of Oklahoma, on the 10th day of December, 1946, by filing his petition in the District Court of Kiowa County, Oklahoma, to recover damages for personal injuries from the defendant, Earl Frances Cornelius, not a citizen of the State of Oklahoma, said injuries being sustained by plaintiff as a result of the negligent acts of the defendant in driving an automobile onto the plaintiff while plaintiff was at work for the Oklahoma State Highway Commission on U. S. HighwayNo. 66, on the 29th day of December, 1945.That thereafter said action was by the defendant removed to this Court.
The Court finds that at the commencement of this action the plaintiff was in fact a citizen of the State of Oklahoma and that the defendant was in fact not a citizen of the State of Oklahoma, and the suit was properly removable to this Court.
The Court further finds that on the 29th day of December, 1945the plaintiff was employed by the Oklahoma State Highway Commission and on said date, in accord with his employment, was working on U. S. HighwayNo. 66 approximately 17 miles west of the City of Clinton, in Washita County, Oklahoma; that on said date, and while the plaintiff was so employed and working in the course of his employment, the defendant negligently drove his automobile onto the plaintiff, knocking plaintiff unconscious and carrying or dragging him down the highway several feet and inflicting upon plaintiff serious bodily injuries; that plaintiff was immediately taken by ambulance to the Tisdal Hospital at Elk City, Oklahoma, where he remained, receiving active treatment for his injuries, for more than six weeks.That the plaintiff from said accident sustained a serious fracture of the right leg and of the right arm and other bodily injuries, from which he is now suffering serious and permanent disabilities.
The Court finds that prior to the 8th day of January, 1946the plaintiff had filled out his Form Three, Employee's First Notice of Injury and Claim for Compensation, to be filed with the State Industrial Commission of the State of Oklahoma, claiming compensation as provided by the Workmen's Compensation Law of the State of Oklahoma, 85 O.S.1941 § et seq.; that by the provisions of said compensation laws and because of plaintiff's regular wages in his said employment the plaintiff was entitled to receive as compensation while disabled from said injuries the sum of $21.00 per week, not exceeding 500 weeks, and the ...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
McCarthy v. Cahill
...a statement was made, and the Court is not indicating a belief that this is the case, it would be material. Accord Elledge v. Cornelius, 86 F. Supp. 766 (W.D. Okla.1947). The final contention advanced by the defendant is that the plaintiffs cannot claim that their reliance on the agent's re......
-
Gilman v. KESTRAL CORPORATION
...86 F. Supp. 765 ... KESTRAL CORPORATION ... Civ. A. No. 7988 ... United States District Court D. Massachusetts ... ...
-
State Highway Dept. v. Elledge
... ... state highway one Earl Cornelius, a resident of California, ... [209 P.2d 705] ... and not in the employ of the State Highway ... ...