Britton v. Gannon
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
285 P.2d 407, 350 U.S. 886, 76 S.Ct. 140 (1955)
- Written by John Waller, JD
Facts
In a prior action, Mark Gannon (plaintiff) sued W.R. Britton (defendant) and others in the Circuit Court of Fayette County in Illinois to recover certain personal property owned by Mark Gannon’s brother, Roy (Spike) Gannon. Spike Gannon told Britton that he was a necessary defendant, but assured him that no judgment would be taken against him. Britton relied on Spike Gannon’s representations, and made no effort to defend the suit. The Illinois state court entered judgment in favor of Mark Gannon against Britton for $18,000. Thereafter, Mark Gannon brought this action to enforce that judgment in the District Court of Pontotoc County in Oklahoma against Britton. At trial, the evidence of Spike Gannon’s extrinsic fraud was not admitted because the Oklahoma state court held that the full faith and credit clause precluded it from considering the validity of Britton’s defense. As a result, the court entered judgment in favor of Mark Gannon. Britton appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in refusing to allow him to introduce evidence demonstrating that the Illinois judgment was not entitled to full faith and credit in Oklahoma because it was secured by extrinsic fraud.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Arnold, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
