Campbell v. Lane

1912 OK 333, 123 P. 1061, 31 Okla. 757, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 137
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 14, 1912
Docket1737
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 1912 OK 333 (Campbell v. Lane) 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
Campbell v. Lane, 1912 OK 333, 123 P. 1061, 31 Okla. 757, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 137 (Okla. 1912).

Opinion

HAYES, J.

Plaintiff in error, plaintiff below, brought this action of unlawful detainer in a justice of the peace court in Nowata county for the recovery of the possession of certain real property which he alleged was unlawfully detained by defendant in error, defendant below. Judgment was rendered in said justice’s court against plaintiff in error, from which judgment he appealed to the county court of Nowata county, where, on the 19th day of May, a like judgment was rendered, assessing costs against plaintiff in error.

The cause was tried to the court, without the intervention of a jury, and is now before us for review on a transcript. The following assignments of error are urged for reversal of the cause: (1) Said court erred in sustaining defendant’s demurrer to the evidence. (2) Said court erred in discharging the jury before they rendered a verdict. (3) Said court erred in assessing costs against plaintiff in error.

*758 It cannot be determined from the foregoing assignments of error, without reviewing the evidence taken at the trial of the cause, whether any prejudicial error was committed by the trial court. No motion for a new trial was filed by plaintiff in error. It 'is a well-settled rule of law that errors occurring at the trial of a cause cannot be reviewed in this court, although the cause was tried to the court without the intervention of a jury, unless the errors complained of have been called to the attention of the trial court by a motion for a new trial. Nelson et al. v. Glenn et al., 28 Okla. 575, 115 Pac. 471; Ahern-Ott Mfg. Co. v. Condon et al., 23 Okla. 365, 100 Pac. 556.

The proceeding in error is accordingly dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Bilby v. Cathcart
1915 OK 640 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1915)
City of Muskogee v. Irvin
1914 OK 641 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Shives v. Frohberg
1913 OK 617 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1912 OK 333, 123 P. 1061, 31 Okla. 757, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 137, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/campbell-v-lane-okla-1912.