Barham v. Gilbert
Cases that cite this one
20 later published cases cite this decision.
- Frazier v. Bryan Memorial Hospital Authority (Okla. 1989)
- Ace Oilfield Rentals LLC v. Western Dakota and Fabrication LLC (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 2022)
- Hitch Enterprises, Inc. v. Cimarex Energy Co. (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 2012)
- King v. Modern Music Co. (Okla. Civ. App. 2001)
- Warner v. Hillcrest Medical Center (Okla. Civ. App. 1995)
- Sautbine v. Keller (Okla. 1966)
- Hall-Hoskins v. CATC Medstaff, P.C. (United States District Court, Oklahoma Northern 2021)
- Hatfield v. Thompson (In re Thompson) (United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma 2017)
- In re Expert South Tulsa, LLC (United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Kansas 2011)
- Hamilton v. Water Whole International Corp. (10th Cir. 2008)
- McCall v. Chesapeake Energy Corp. (Okla. Civ. App. 2007)
- Ellsworth Motor v. North American (10th Cir. 2000)
- Roberts Ranch Co. v. Exxon Corp. (United States District Court, Oklahoma Western 1997)
- Oklahoma Oil & Gas Exploration Drilling Program 1983-A v. W.M.A. Corp. (Okla. Civ. App. 1994)
- Tara Petroleum Corp. v. Hughey (Okla. 1981)
- Virginia M. Edgar v. Fred Jones Lincoln-Mercury of Oklahoma City, Inc. And Fred Jones, Inc. (10th Cir. 1975)
- Mull v. Colt Co. (District Court, S.D. New York 1962)
- Gulf Oil Corporation v. State (Okla. 1961)
- Gibson Products Co. v. Murphy (Okla. 1940)
- Continental Oil Co. v. Berry (Okla. 1940)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
This is an appeal from a judgment in foreclosure. A judgment was obtained by the Prudential Insurance Company of America on its cross-petition foreclosing its mortgage on certain real property. John I. Gilbert, as receiver of' Gum Brothers, a corporation, was also awarded a judgment. In the brief of the plaintiff in error it is stated:
“The only point involved in this case is that the Prudential Insurance Company was a nonresident corporation doing a general loan business in the state of Oklahoma and has never complied with sections 131, 132, and 135 of the Compiled Laws of 1931, and has not complied with section 43, article 9, of the Constitution of the state of Oklahoma, and cannot maintain a suit on the contract sued on.”
John r. Gilbert, as receiver of Gum Brothers Company, has filed a motion to dismiss for the reason that there is no contest upon the right of ,John T. Gilbert as receiver to have his judgment.
Response to the motion has been filed, which is in effect an admission of this motion, and we see no reason to trouble the receiver with the necessity of filing a brief, and the motion to dismiss is therefore sustained without prejudice to the plaintiffs in error to have determined the question remaining between the plaintiffs in error and the Prudential Insurance Company of America.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.