Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Rath

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Rath

1912 OK 313, 124 P. 59, 32 Okla. 857, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 351

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 14, 1912

Docket1844

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1912 OK 313 (Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Rath) 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

Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. Rath, 1912 OK 313, 124 P. 59, 32 Okla. 857, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 351 (Okla. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

BREWER, C.

The petition in error and transcript of the record was filed in this court on July 6, 1910. The plaintiff 'in error has failed to file any brief in the case. Th§ petition in error shall therefore be dismissed for want of prosecution. Hass et al. v. McCampbell, 27 Okla. 290, 111 Pac. 543; Maddin v. McCormick et al., 27 Okla. 778, 117 Pac. 200; McC lelland v. Witherall, 30 Okla. 287, 119 Pac. 205.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Opinion by

BREWER, C.

The petition in error and transcript of the record was filed in this court on July 6, 1910. The plaintiff 'in error has failed to file any brief in the case. Th§ petition in error shall therefore be dismissed for want of prosecution. Hass et al. v. McCampbell, 27 Okla. 290, 111 Pac. 543; Maddin v. McCormick et al., 27 Okla. 778, 117 Pac. 200; McC lelland v. Witherall, 30 Okla. 287, 119 Pac. 205.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1912 OK 313, 124 P. 59, 32 Okla. 857, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/atchison-t-s-f-ry-co-v-rath-okla-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack