Adair Realty & Trust Co. v. Harnage

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Adair Realty & Trust Co. v. Harnage

1931 OK 24, 296 P. 201, 147 Okla. 179, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 741

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 3, 1931

Docket21558

StatusPublished

This text of 1931 OK 24 (Adair Realty & Trust Co. v. Harnage) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adair Realty & Trust Co. v. Harnage, 1931 OK 24, 296 P. 201, 147 Okla. 179, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 741 (Okla. 1931).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Muskogee county, rendered on the 30th day of January, 1930, in an action wherein the plaintiff in error was plaintiff. The motion for new trial was overruled February 1, 3930, and the time in which to serve case-made was extended 60 days from that date. On April 1, 1930, by order of the court, the time to serve case-made- was extended 60 days from that date. On May 30, 1930. the time in which to serve case-made was by order of the court extended 30 days from date. No further orders extending such time were made.

The ease-made was served upon the defendant in error on June 30, 1930. and the certificate of the trial judge recites tliac, “Upon examination of the said case-made I find that same has been duly prepared and served' upon the defendant herein within the time allowed by law and by the orders of this court.”

The time in which to serve the case-made as extended by order of the court of May 30, 1930, expired on June 29, 1930. The case-made served June 30, 1930, was not served within the time allowed by law or a valid order of the court, is a nullity, and brings nothing before this court for review. Shinn v. Oklahoma City Building & Loan Ass’n, 130 Okla. 173, 266 Pac. 435; Petty v. Foster, 122 Okla. 153, 252 Pac. 836; Harrison v. Reed, 81 Okla. 149, 197 Pac. 159.

The purported record presented clearly shows the recital in the certificate of the trial judge, ¡(hat the case-made had been duly served within the time allowed by law and the order of the court, is erroneous, and in such case the record will control. Town v. Crawford, 106 Okla. 254. 234 Pac. 208.

For the reason there is nothing before this court for review, the appeal is dismissed.

Note. — See under (1) anno. 42 L. R. A. (N. S.) 623; 2 R. C. L. p. 159; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 352.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court of Muskogee county, rendered on the 30th day of January, 1930, in an action wherein the plaintiff in error was plaintiff. The motion for new trial was overruled February 1, 3930, and the time in which to serve case-made was extended 60 days from that date. On April 1, 1930, by order of the court, the time to serve case-made- was extended 60 days from that date. On May 30, 1930. the time in which to serve case-made was by order of the court extended 30 days from date. No further orders extending such time were made.

The ease-made was served upon the defendant in error on June 30, 1930. and the certificate of the trial judge recites tliac, “Upon examination of the said case-made I find that same has been duly prepared and served' upon the defendant herein within the time allowed by law and by the orders of this court.”

The time in which to serve the case-made as extended by order of the court of May 30, 1930, expired on June 29, 1930. The case-made served June 30, 1930, was not served within the time allowed by law or a valid order of the court, is a nullity, and brings nothing before this court for review. Shinn v. Oklahoma City Building & Loan Ass’n, 130 Okla. 173, 266 Pac. 435; Petty v. Foster, 122 Okla. 153, 252 Pac. 836; Harrison v. Reed, 81 Okla. 149, 197 Pac. 159.

The purported record presented clearly shows the recital in the certificate of the trial judge, ¡(hat the case-made had been duly served within the time allowed by law and the order of the court, is erroneous, and in such case the record will control. Town v. Crawford, 106 Okla. 254. 234 Pac. 208.

For the reason there is nothing before this court for review, the appeal is dismissed.

Note. — See under (1) anno. 42 L. R. A. (N. S.) 623; 2 R. C. L. p. 159; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 352.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1931 OK 24, 296 P. 201, 147 Okla. 179, 1931 Okla. LEXIS 741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adair-realty-trust-co-v-harnage-okla-1931.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack