SINCLAIR TEXAS PIPE LINE CO. v. PATTERSON

SINCLAIR TEXAS PIPE LINE CO. v. PATTERSON
1935 OK 1211
54 P.2d 207
175 Okla. 438
Case Number: 23528
Decided: 12/17/1935
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

SINCLAIR TEXAS PIPE LINE CO. et al.
v.
PATTERSON

Syllabus

Syllabus Adopted.

¶0 The syllabus in Sinclair Texas Pipe Line Co. et al. v. H. E. Ross, 175 Okla. 435, 54 P.2d 204, this day decided, is hereby adopted as the syllabus in this opinion.

Appeal from District Court, Payne County; Freeman E. Miller, Judge.

Action by Elmer Patterson against the Sinclair Texas Pipe Line Company et al. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Edward H. Chandler, Ralph W. Garrett, J. S. Ross, S. J. Clay, and Jas. H. Ross, for plaintiffs in error
Speakman & Speakman, for defendant in error.

OSBORN, V. C. J.

¶1 This action was instituted in the district court of Payne county by Elmer Patterson, as plaintiff, against the Sinclair Texas Pipe Line Company, Ed Wheeler, and Meador & Whitaker. us defendants, wherein plaintiff sought to recover damages for personal injuries. The cause was tried to a jury, and a verdict rendered in favor of plaintiff. From a judgment thereon defendants appeal.

¶2 Pending the appeal in this court, plaintiff, Elmer Patterson. died and the cause was revived in the name of Lula Patterson, administratrix of the estate of the deceased. Defendant Meador also died pending the appeal, and the cause was revived in the name of O. C Whitaker, the surviving partner.

¶3 We have examined the record and briefs, and it appears that the issues of law and fact are identical with the issues involved in Sinclair Texas Pipe Line Co. et al. v. H. E. Ross, 175 Okla. 43,5, 54 P.2d 204, this day decided by this court, and said decision is controlling as to the issues involved herein.

¶4 Accordingly the judgment of the trial court as affirmed.