Blumhoff v. Akers

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Blumhoff v. Akers

1937 OK 485, 71 P.2d 733, 180 Okla. 589, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 512

Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided September 21, 1937·No. No. 28028.·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

A motion to dismiss has been filed on the ground that the appeal was-not filed until more than six months after the date of the judgment rendered. On July 31, 1937, this court called for a response by the plaintiff in error. No response has been filed and no excuse is offered for the failure to comply with the order of this court.

Under the rule announced in French v. Bragg, 177 Okla. 43, 55 P. (2d) 953, it is not the duty .of this court to search for some theory upon which to sustain the appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

OSBORN, C. J., and RILEY, PHELPS, HURST, and DAVISON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

A motion to dismiss has been filed on the ground that the appeal was-not filed until more than six months after the date of the judgment rendered. On July 31, 1937, this court called for a response by the plaintiff in error. No response has been filed and no excuse is offered for the failure to comply with the order of this court.

Under the rule announced in French v. Bragg, 177 Okla. 43, 55 P. (2d) 953, it is not the duty .of this court to search for some theory upon which to sustain the appeal.

The appeal is dismissed.

OSBORN, C. J., and RILEY, PHELPS, HURST, and DAVISON, JJ., concur.

Blumhoff v. Akers, 1937 OK 485, 71 P.2d 733, 180 Okla. 589, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 512 (Okla. 1937).

Pincite

1937 OK 485 (Blumhoff v. Akers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related