Feterly v. Gage

1927 OK 48, 253 P. 499, 122 Okla. 229, 1927 Okla. LEXIS 170
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedFebruary 22, 1927
Docket18088
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 1927 OK 48 (Feterly v. Gage) 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
Feterly v. Gage, 1927 OK 48, 253 P. 499, 122 Okla. 229, 1927 Okla. LEXIS 170 (Okla. 1927).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs in error, in their petition in error, complain of the action of the trial court in rendering judgment against them in favor of defendants in error on the 4th day of May, 192~, and predicate two assignments of error on the action of the trial court in rendering said judgment. The petition in errol' was filed in this court on January 11, 1027.

Section 798, `Comp, Stats. 1921, provides that proceedings for reviewing, vacating, or modifying judgments or final orders shall l)e commenced within six months from the rendition of the judgment or final order com~ plained of.

The six months' period in which to prosecute the appeal from said judgment in this cause expired November 4, 1926, and this court is without jurisdiction to review the judgment appealed twin. Landers v. Bank of Commerce of Okmulgee. 106 Okla. 59, 233 Pac. 200; Gelabert v. State. 104 Okla. 31, 230 Pac. 230.

Plaintiffs in error filed two motions and a petition ii~ the trial court to vacate said judgment rendered `by the trial court on May 4. 192G, and in their petition in error predicate error on the action of the trial court in overruling said motions and denying relief under the petition.

No final order is contained in the case-made showing the action of the trial court thereon, and such action of the trial eou~t is shown only by the clerk's oinutes, which are no part of the record, and presents nothing to this court for review. Lillard v. Meisberger, 113 Okla. 228, 240 Pac. 1067.

Undei siieh a state of the record a~ in this case, the appeal should be and is dismissed.

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

Related

Anderson v. Francis
1936 OK 312 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1936)
Harris v. Smith
1931 OK 341 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1931)
Dorchester v. Lewis
1928 OK 537 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1927 OK 48, 253 P. 499, 122 Okla. 229, 1927 Okla. LEXIS 170, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/feterly-v-gage-okla-1927.