Wm. Cameron & Co. v. Henderson
| Decision Date | 14 April 1914 |
| Docket Number | 3355. |
| Citation | 140 P. 404,40 Okla. 648,1914 OK 195 |
| Parties | WM. CAMERON & CO. v. HENDERSON. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
Where the evidence is sufficient to reasonably tend to support the allegations of a petition that states a cause of action, a demurrer to such evidence should be overruled.
It is a settled rule that a demurrer to the evidence admits all the facts which the evidence in the slightest degree tends to prove, and all inferences or conclusions that may be reasonably and logically drawn from the evidence.
Error from District Court, Greer County; G. A. Brown, Judge.
Action by William Cameron & Co., a corporation, against R. B Henderson. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Reversed and remanded.
This is a proceeding in error from the district court of Greer county, wherein plaintiff in error (plaintiff below) alleges that he furnished the lumber and other material to be used in the erection of improvements upon some raw land owned by Arthur Boone at the time the lumber was furnished; that the contract for the material was made with Arthur Boone, and the lumber hauled by him to his place (being the land described) and was used in the erection of the buildings, the land being the W. 1/2 and S.E. 1/4, both of the S.W. 1/4 of the S.W. 1/4 of the N.W. 1/4 of section 5, township 4 north, of range 23 west, I. M., and to foreclose a materialman's lien thereon.
A disposal of one of the questions presented disposes of the case, and that is the first assignment of error raised by the plaintiff in error, which is that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer of said defendant to the evidence submitted by plaintiff in error.
The case was brought against Arthur Boone, the original owner of the land, and to whom the material was furnished, and Henderson, who afterwards purchased the land. At the trial after plaintiff rested his case, the defendant R. B Henderson demurred to the sufficiency of the evidence in this case, and the court after announcing that it would sustain the demurrer, plaintiff's counsel asked to withdraw their announcement for trial for the purpose of getting other testimony, to which the court said it did not have the time, and that "we cannot wait for you," and, then upon plaintiff's motion to take a nonsuit, the court, over the objections of defendant, permitted plaintiff to take a nonsuit. Subsequently the plaintiff's motion to reinstate said cause was heard by the court, and said motion was granted, to which the defendant Henderson excepted. Whereupon the court, after permitting said cause reinstated, sustained the defendant's motion for judgment as to him and gave judgment for plaintiff against Arthur Boone. This proceeding was had upon the action of the court sustaining the demurrer to the evidence without a hearing upon the merits.
The evidence submitted by plaintiff is set forth in plaintiff's brief, and the same...
To continue reading
Request your trial