Case ID: okla_65/html/0094-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HIGGINS, 0.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

PARNOSKI(Y) et al. v. LUMKIN et al.
    No. 7044
    Opinion Filed Jan. 2, 1917.
    Rehearing Denied March 20, 1917.
    (163 Pac. 527.)
    Indians — Allotments—Descent .and Distribution.
    Syllabus same as in Thompson v. Cornelius, 53 Okla. 85, 155 Pac. 602.
    (-Syllabus by Huggins, C.)
    Error from Superior Court, Tulsa County; M. A. Breekenridge, Judge.
    Action by Lucinda Lumkin, for the use and benefit of Robert Fry and Robert Fry and E. E. Stafford, against the defendants, Noah Parnoski(y) and Thomas Tiger, guardian ad litem. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal.
    Affirmed.
    W. A. Brigham, for plaintiffs in error.
    A. J. Biddison and Harry Campbell, for defendants in error.
   Opinion by

HIGGINS, 0.

The parties to this suit will be designated^ as they were in the lower court. Barney Lumkin, a full-blood Indian and member of the Creek Tribe of Indians, was allotted 160 acres of land in the Creek Nation. He died intestate in Tulsa county September 24, 1912, leaving a full-blood heir.

The only issue involved in this suit is whether or not the laws of the state of Oklahoma or chapter 49 of Mansfield’s Digest of the Laws of Arkansas controls the devolution of this estate. The judgment of the lower court was that the laws of the state of Oklahoma controlled. An appeal was taken by the defendant to this court. Since the taking of this appeal the issue involved has been decided by this court, holding the laws of Oklahoma control. Thompson v. Cornelius, 53 Okla. 85, 155 Pac. 602; Aldridge et al. v. Whitten, 56 Okla. 694, 156 Pac. 667.

We recommend that the judgment of the lower court be affirmed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.