PEERSON v. UNITED TIRE & INV. CO.

Annotate this Case

PEERSON v. UNITED TIRE & INV. CO.
1944 OK 284
152 P.2d 385
194 Okla. 431
Case Number: 31457
Decided: 10/17/1944
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

PEERSON
v.
UNITED TIRE & INV. CO.

Syllabus

¶0 JUSTICES OF THE PEACE--Right of appeal where amount sued for including attorney fee exceeded $20.
Where plaintff brings an action for $5.56, balance due on a promissory note, and $25 attorney fees, the amount involved exceeds the statutory minimum of $20 set by 39 0. S. 1941 § 250 and it is error to dismiss an appeal from the justice of the peace court on the ground that the amount involved was less than $20 even though the judgment entered in the justice court is less than $20.

Appeal from Court of Common Pleas, Tulsa County; John T. Harley, Judge.

Action upon a promissory note by United Tire & Investment Company against John Peerson, doing business as Peerson Motor Company. From a judgment dismissing the appeal from the justice of the peace court to the court of common pleas, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

Hughey Baker, of Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.
W. S. Myers, of Tulsa, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Plaintiff brought an action in the justice of the peace court to recover $5.56 and $25 attorney fees on a promissory note. Judgment was for the plaintiff for $5.56, the amount sued for, and $10 attorney fees. The case was appealed by the defendant and the same came on for trial in the court of common pleas. On motion of the plaintiff the trial court dismissed the appeal for the reason that the amount involved was less than $20. The court erred in dismissing the appeal. 39 O. S. 1941 § 250; St. Louis, S. F. R. Co. v. Tolbert, 47 Okla. 228, 148 P. 128; Deming Inv. Co. v. Blakemore, 62 Okla. 222, 162 P. 201; Barnes v. C. B. Cozart Grain Co., 59 Okla. 157, 158 P. 441; Tulsa Cab Co. v. Warfield, 188 Okla. 642, 112 P.2d 366; Summers v. Powers, 181 Okla. 549, 75 P.2d 411.

¶2 The amount sought to be recovered in the bill of particulars or the answer and cross-petition filed determines the amount involved. The bill of particulars sought to recover $30.56 and exceeds the $20 mentioned in 39 O. S. 1941 § 250.

¶3 The cause is reversed and remanded with directions to set aside the order of dismissal and reinstate the appeal.

¶4 CORN, C.J., GIBSON, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., 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.