HOCKER v. PAYNE

Annotate this Case

HOCKER v. PAYNE
1913 OK 708
139 P. 121
40 Okla. 458
Case Number: 3658
Decided: 12/16/1913
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

HOCKER et al.
v.
PAYNE et al.

Syllabus

¶0 COLLECTION OF TAXES-- Injunction--Former Opinion Followed. Affirmed, upon the authority of Thurston, County Treas., v. Caldwell et al., ante, 137 P. 683.

Rennie, Hocker & Moore, for plaintiffs in error.

A. W. Wadlington, G. A. Paul, Warren K. Snyder, and Harry White, for defendants in error.

KANE, J.

¶1 This was a suit in equity, commenced by the plaintiffs in error, plaintiffs below, against the defendants in error, defendants below, as city clerk of the city of Purcell and county treasurer of the county of McClain, respectively, to enjoin the city clerk from certifying said taxes to the county treasurer of said county and the county treasurer from placing said assessments upon the delinquent tax rolls of said county, and praying that upon a final hearing the said injunction be made perpetual. Upon trial, there was judgment for the defendants, and a decree was entered, dissolving the temporary injunction, which had theretofore been issued against them, to reverse which action of the court below this proceeding in error was commenced. There is a stipulation on file to the effect that the briefs in Thurston, County Treas., v. Caldwell et al., ante, 137 P. 683, shall be considered in this case. It is true there are additional briefs filed in the instant case by counsel for the respective parties, but if it is intended to raise any additional questions than those decided in Thurston, County Treas., v. Caldwell et al., supra, the briefs on file do not sufficiently comply with rule 25 of this court (38 Okla. x) to enable us to review such additional questions without an examination of the record itself. As the decree of the court below seems to be in harmony with the views expressed by this court in Thurston, County Treas., v. Caldwell et al., supra, the judgment and decree of the court below must be affirmed, upon the authority of that case.

¶2 All the Justices concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.