Dunn v. Lewis

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Dunn v. Lewis

1912 OK 622, 126 P. 719, 33 Okla. 624, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 759

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedOctober 15, 1912

Docket3904

StatusPublished

This text of 1912 OK 622 (Dunn v. Lewis) 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

Dunn v. Lewis, 1912 OK 622, 126 P. 719, 33 Okla. 624, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 759 (Okla. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

KANE, J.

This cause comes on to be heard upon the motion of the defendant in error to dismiss the appeal of the plaintiffs in error upon the ground, among others, “that the petition in error was filed in this court on the first day of May, 1912, more than 40 days next preceding this motion, and counsel for the plaintiffs in error have neglected, failed and refused to serve on counsel for the defendant in error their brief in support of said petition in error.”

*625 The motion to dismiss is unopposed, and as, up to this time, plaintiffs in error have not asked leave fi> file brief out of time or otherwise indicated a purpose to further prosecute this appeal, it must be sustained. It is so ordered.

TURNER, C.' J., and WIEEIAMS and DUNN, JJ., concur; HAYES, J., absent, and not participating.

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

KANE, J.

This cause comes on to be heard upon the motion of the defendant in error to dismiss the appeal of the plaintiffs in error upon the ground, among others, “that the petition in error was filed in this court on the first day of May, 1912, more than 40 days next preceding this motion, and counsel for the plaintiffs in error have neglected, failed and refused to serve on counsel for the defendant in error their brief in support of said petition in error.”

*625 The motion to dismiss is unopposed, and as, up to this time, plaintiffs in error have not asked leave fi> file brief out of time or otherwise indicated a purpose to further prosecute this appeal, it must be sustained. It is so ordered.

TURNER, C.' J., and WIEEIAMS and DUNN, JJ., concur; HAYES, J., absent, and not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1912 OK 622, 126 P. 719, 33 Okla. 624, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 759, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dunn-v-lewis-okla-1912.