Campbell v. Newton Driskill
1915 OK 734, 152 P. 841, 52 Okla. 517, 1915 Okla. LEXIS 316
Opinion
Opinion by
The defendants in error have filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, assigning as grounds therefor the alleged failure of plaintiff in error to comply with rule 25 of this court (38 Okla. x, 137 Pac. xi) in the preparation of his brief. We find that said brief substantially conforms to said rule, and said motion to dismiss should be denied, and defendants in error allowed 20 days to file answer 'brief.
Motion to dismiss denied.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Campbell v. Newton Driskill, 1915 OK 734, 152 P. 841, 52 Okla. 517, 1915 Okla. LEXIS 316 (Okla. 1915).
1915 OK 734 (Campbell v. Newton Driskill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Dill v. Rader
1978 OK 78 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1978)
State v. Erwin
120 P.2d 285 (Utah Supreme Court, 1941)
Nease v. National Bank of Commerce
1935 OK 1021 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1935)
T. M. Dover Mercantile Co v. Gates
1929 OK 107 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1929)
Security Nat. Bank v. Bohnefeld
1928 OK 201 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1928)
Baird v. Perry
218 N.W. 229 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1927)
American Nat. Bank of Oklahoma City v. Jorden
1926 OK 509 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1926)
Farmers & Merchants Savings Bank v. Jones
196 Iowa 1071 (Supreme Court of Iowa, 1923)