Wetzel v. Evans
| Decision Date | 21 March 1944 |
| Docket Number | 31187. |
| Citation | 147 P.2d 133,194 Okla. 20,1944 OK 148 |
| Parties | WETZEL v. EVANS. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. Under Title 12, Sec. 268, O.S.1941, the sufficiency of a petition to state a cause of action may be raised for the first time on appeal only when the fault therein is such as to disclose lack of jurisdiction.
2. Where the trial court has jurisdiction of the parties, of the subject matter, and the particular questions involved, and the allegations in the original petition are sufficient to challenge a judicial inquiry, the judgment rendered by such court is not void on account of an amendable defect or insufficiency in the petition.
3. Under our code procedure and system of code pleading, the court is endowed with the dual powers of a court of equity and a court of law and redress for every remediable wrong may be had by a civil action upon the facts stated in a pleading called a petition.
4. Where a pleading is indorsed a "petition," as the statute requires, with allegations showing that plaintiff has wrongfully sustained a detriment, a wrong for which the law or equity provides a redress, then from the nature of the facts stated, the court, vested as it is with the dual powers of a chancellor and a court of law, will determine and grant the proper relief.
Appeal from District Court, Payne County; Henry W. Hoel, Judge.
Action by Charles M. Evans, executor of the estate of Alexander Evans, deceased, against Carl Wetzel, for relief from effects of a contract with an alleged incompetent person. From a judgment in damages for plaintiff, the defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
Blakely M. Murphy, of Stillwater, for plaintiff in error.
Leon J York, of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, and Walter Mathews, of Cushing, for defendant in error.
Charles M. Evans, as executor of Alexander Evans, deceased, sued defendant Carl Wetzel for $4800 damages. The petition alleged that Alexander Evans owned certain real estate worth $6000 that shortly before he died, while quite advanced in age, and of impaired mental capacity, or lacking mental capacity, he was imposed upon by defendant who took advantage of him and wrongfully obtained his deed to the land for $1200.
Defendant denied decedent was of impaired mentality and asserted the land was fairly purchased both as to method and price.
Upon jury trial, with the evidence of each party, and the trial statements of each party, tending to support his theories above stated, there was general verdict and judgment for plaintiff for $919.25.
For reversal the defendant relies upon one proposition, to-wit error of the court in overruling defendant's motion to vacate judgment for the reason that the petition failed to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
There were no objections made in any manner to the sufficiency of the petition until the matter was presented in defendant's motion for new trial or to vacate the judgment. No demurrer to the evidence was interposed by either party nor was there any motion for directed verdict. At the close of the evidence the court, without objections or exceptions, instructed the jury in clear accord with the trial theory and contentions of the parties as above set out. Defendant offered no requested instruction.
In support of his right to attack the sufficiency of the petition under the facts here, defendant cites Zahn v. Obert, 60 Okl. 118, 159 P. 298. That case is authority for the rule that such questions as go to the jurisdiction of the court may be raised at any time. He also cites Perry v. Snyder, 75 Okl. 24, 181 P. 147. Therein the petition affirmatively showed on its face that plaintiff was entitled to no relief and the petition was held to affirmatively disclose lack of jurisdiction in the trial court to grant any relief to plaintiff. We do not consider those cases as sustaining defendant's right to attack the petition herein under this record.
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial