Berry v. Woodward

1913 OK 240, 133 P. 1127, 38 Okla. 468, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 402
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided April 15, 1913·No. 2510·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

KANE, J.

This is an appeal from the action of the court below in sustaining a demurrer to the petition of the plaintiff in error, plaintiff below. As counsel for the plaintiff in error has not complied with rule 25 (20 Oída, xii, 95 Pac. viii) of this court by setting forth material parts of the petition against which the demurrer was directed, the court declines to, review the question raised. The rule requires that:

“The brief of the plaintiff in error in all eases except felonies shall contain an abstract or abridgment of the transcript, setting forth the material parts of the pleadings, proceedings, facts and documents upon which he relies, together with such other statements from the record as are necessary to a full understanding of the questions presented to this court for decision, so that no examination of the record itself need be made in this court.”

A substantial compliance with this rule is mandatory.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Berry v. Woodward, 1913 OK 240, 133 P. 1127, 38 Okla. 468, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 402 (Okla. 1913).

1913 OK 240 (Berry v. Woodward) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Oriental Cement Plaster Co. v. Roman Nose Gypsum Co.
1915 OK 1095 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)
E. G. Rall Grain Co. v. First State Bank of McQueen
1913 OK 651 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)
Moore v. Adams
1913 OK 614 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)