Simmons v. Benson
| Decision Date | 27 May 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 35126,35126 |
| Parties | SIMMONS et al. v. BENSON. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. A statute should be given a construction which renders every word and sentence operative, rather than a construction that renders some words or sentences idle and nugatory.
2. Under the provisions of 4 O.S.1951 § 81.1, the sheriff, before selling cattle taken up as strays, must, in addition to the twenty-day notice set out in the section, given an additional ten days' notice of such sale.
3. Record examined, and held, that the evidence was sufficient to support the judgment of the trial court.
Claud H. Smith, County Atty., of Cotton County, Walter Hubbell, and Gordon Coker, all of Walters, for plaintiffs in error.
Wm. T. Powell, and Funston Flanagan, Walters, for defendant in error.
This is an action in replevin brought by plaintiff, Nile Benson, against Fred Simmons, and Boyd Vantine, as Sheriff of Cotton County, to recover five steers which it is alleged the defendants wrongfully hold in their possession. The defendants filed general denials by way of answers. The case was tried to the court without a jury and at the conclusion of all the evidence the trial court rendered judgment for plaintiff for the possession of two of the animals he sought to recover, he being unable to identify the other three. Defendants appeal.
From the record it appears that defendant, Simmons, took up the five steers which were trespassing upon his wheat filed, and being unable to find the owner turned them over to the sheriff who advertised them for sale and sold them at public auction, Simmons being the purchaser. Thereafter plaintiff, discovering that five of his steers were missing, went to Simmons' place and identified the two animals still in Simmons' possession as being his cattle. The trial court held that the notice of sale was insufficient and rendered the sale void, and further held that the evidence was sufficient to show that plaintiff was the owner of the two steers in Simmons' possession. He accordingly rendered judgment for plaintiff for the recovery of the two steers or their value if they could not be delivered to plaintiff.
Defendants contend that there was no competent evidence to support the judgment, and also contend that the notice given of the sale of the animals as estrays was sufficient.
Taking up the last contention first, 4 O.S.1951 § 81.1, providing for notice of the sale of stray animals, as to the description of the animals to be given in the notice, reads as follows:
'(Describe the stray, by stating the kind of animal, color, weight, size, sex, age, the marks, brands or other distinguishing features about the animal, if any there be, and where the animal is kept and address of taker-up)'.
The notice given by the sheriff preliminary to the sale, described the property as follows:
'2. half brahma steers branded Z O on left hip wt. 600 lbs, each
'3. red white-face steers branded lazy L on left hip wt 600 1bs. each.'
It is to be noted that the notice does not state the approximate age of the cattle, nor does it reveal the fact that all of them had bobbed tails, which the plaintiff testified was the distinguishing mark by which he could identify the animals.
No other notice of the sale was given by the sheriff. After setting out the form of notice to be given by the sheriff, the statute provides as follows:
'If the owner of said stray does not appear and claim the same within twenty (20) days from the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Woolen v. Coffman
...which renders every word and sentence operative. Swanson v. City of Tulsa, 633 P.2d 1256 (Okl.Cr.1981) (quoting from Simmons v. Benson, 206 Okl. 539, 244 P.2d 1126 (1952)). Accordingly, § 142.18(A) and (B) are directed against any person "convicted", that is, formally pronounced guilty upon......
-
Western Auto Supply Co. v. Oklahoma Tax Commission, 37861
...every word and sentence operative rather than' one which would render some words or sentences idle and nugatory. See Simmons v. Benson, 206 Okl. 539, 244 P.2d 1126. We, therefore, conclude that the income taxes appellant paid other states in which it operates, for the years involved in this......
-
Dulick v. Oklahoma City
...provision meaningless and a nullity, and thus to violence to a well-recognized principle of statutory construction. See Simmons v. Benson, 206 Okl. 539, 244 P.2d 1126. There is a marked difference between the statutory provision involved in this case, and the one involved in Jungels v. Town......
-
Board of Adjustment of City of Oklahoma City v. Board of Ed. of Oklahoma City, 89
...of any apparent conflicts between them, (Spiers v. Magnolia Petroleum Co., 206 Okl. 510, 514, 244 P.2d 852, 857; Simmons v. Benson, 206 Okl. 539, 244 P.2d 1126; Jones v. Bayless, 208 Okl. 270, 255 P.2d 506; 37 Am.Jur., 'Municipal Corporations', sec. 187), we conclude that Sec. 15(9) constit......