GREEN v. SMITH

Annotate this Case

GREEN v. SMITH
1951 OK 160
232 P.2d 406
204 Okla. 595
Case Number: 34852
Decided: 06/05/1951
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

(Syllabus.)

¶0 A license to sell insurance may be revoked by the State Insurance Board for fraud in its procurement.

Appeal from Superior Court, Creek County; Herbert L. Arthurs, Judge.

Action for damages for personal injuries sustained in automobile collision brought by Jack W. Smith, as plaintiff, against Paul L. Green, Yellow Transit Company, a corporation, and Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Company, as defendants. From a verdict and judgment for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Pierce, Rucker, Mock, Tabor & Duncan, Tulsa, for plaintiffs in error.

Ed Chapman, Bristow, and Rosenstein, Fist, Shidler & Webb, Tulsa, for defendant in error.

DAVISON, J.

¶1 Jack W. Smith brought this action in the superior court of Creek county against the defendants, Paul L. Green, Yellow Transit Company, a corporation, and Massachusetts Bonding & Insurance Company to recover damages for personal injuries. The trial resulted in a verdict for the plaintiff and against the defendants. The defendants have appealed.

¶2 This companion case to Green et al. v. Burns, 204 Okla. 415, 230 P.2d 892. The plaintiff in the present case was the driver of the car in which the plaintiff in the above-cited case was a passenger when the collision described in the above case occurred. The facts, as to the negligence on the part of defendants, in each case, are the same and reference is hereby made to the above case for a full statement of the facts.

¶3 The only proposition presented in the present case is that "defendants' motion for a new trial should have been sustained." This question was fully discussed in the above-cited case and the law of this case is governed by the rules of law set forth in the cited companion case.

¶4 Judgment affirmed.

¶5 ARNOLD, C.J., and CORN, GIBSON, HALLEY, and JOHNSON, JJ., concur. O'NEAL, J., dissents.

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.