Dymond Drilling Co. v. Morris

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Dymond Drilling Co. v. Morris

1921 OK 259, 198 P. 88, 81 Okla. 259, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 149

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 10, 1921

Docket10205

StatusPublished

This text of 1921 OK 259 (Dymond Drilling Co. v. Morris) 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

Dymond Drilling Co. v. Morris, 1921 OK 259, 198 P. 88, 81 Okla. 259, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 149 (Okla. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

NICHOLSON, J.

The defendant in error has filed his motion to dismiss the appeal herein, for the reason that this cause was assigned for submission on the 19th day of April, 1921, and the plaintiff in error has failed to file brief as required by law and by the rules of this court, and to said motion has attached a certified copy of the su-persedeas bond and prays judgment against the sureties thereon, and it appearing that the plaintiff in error has agreed that said appeal may be dismissed and judgment rendered as prayed for, it is ordered and adjudged that said appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed, and that said defendant in error do have and recover of and from E. Henson, the surety on the supersedeas bond herein, the sum of $251.20, with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum from the 19th 5ay of April, 1918, and for all costs, for which execution is, hereby awarded, and the court clerk of Pontotoc county, Oklahoma, is directed to enter this judgment of record as required by law.

HARRISON, C. J., and PITCHEORD, Mc-NEILL, and ELTING, JX, concur.

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

NICHOLSON, J.

The defendant in error has filed his motion to dismiss the appeal herein, for the reason that this cause was assigned for submission on the 19th day of April, 1921, and the plaintiff in error has failed to file brief as required by law and by the rules of this court, and to said motion has attached a certified copy of the su-persedeas bond and prays judgment against the sureties thereon, and it appearing that the plaintiff in error has agreed that said appeal may be dismissed and judgment rendered as prayed for, it is ordered and adjudged that said appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed, and that said defendant in error do have and recover of and from E. Henson, the surety on the supersedeas bond herein, the sum of $251.20, with interest thereon at the rate of six per cent, per annum from the 19th 5ay of April, 1918, and for all costs, for which execution is, hereby awarded, and the court clerk of Pontotoc county, Oklahoma, is directed to enter this judgment of record as required by law.

HARRISON, C. J., and PITCHEORD, Mc-NEILL, and ELTING, JX, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1921 OK 259, 198 P. 88, 81 Okla. 259, 1921 Okla. LEXIS 149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dymond-drilling-co-v-morris-okla-1921.