B. E. La Dow & Co. v. Wilson

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

B. E. La Dow & Co. v. Wilson

1921 OK 283, 200 P. 156, 82 Okla. 238, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 256

Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided July 12, 1921·No. 10264·Published

Opinion

*239 KENNAMER, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of Kay county by B. E. La Dow & Company, plaintiff in error, against Joseph W: "Wilson, A. A. McFall, and Charles M.. Baird, as defendants in error.

This cause was set for hearing on the 21)st day of June, 1021. No appearance was made on behalf of the plaintiff in error, and no brief has been filed by plaintiff in error nor excuse presented to the court why the cause has not been briefed on behalf of the plaintiff in error. Under rule No. 7 of this court (47 Okla. vi) the appeal is subject to dismissal. It is, therefore, ordered by the court that the appeal herein be, and the same is dismissed.

PITCHFORD. V. C. J., and MILLER, ELTING, and NICHOLSON, JJ., concur.

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

*239 KENNAMER, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of Kay county by B. E. La Dow & Company, plaintiff in error, against Joseph W: "Wilson, A. A. McFall, and Charles M.. Baird, as defendants in error.

This cause was set for hearing on the 21)st day of June, 1021. No appearance was made on behalf of the plaintiff in error, and no brief has been filed by plaintiff in error nor excuse presented to the court why the cause has not been briefed on behalf of the plaintiff in error. Under rule No. 7 of this court (47 Okla. vi) the appeal is subject to dismissal. It is, therefore, ordered by the court that the appeal herein be, and the same is dismissed.

PITCHFORD. V. C. J., and MILLER, ELTING, and NICHOLSON, JJ., concur.

B. E. La Dow & Co. v. Wilson, 1921 OK 283, 200 P. 156, 82 Okla. 238, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 256 (Okla. 1921).

Pincite

1921 OK 283 (B. E. La Dow & Co. v. Wilson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.