Fink v. Cheyenne Short Line R.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Fink v. Cheyenne Short Line R.

1916 OK 342, 155 P. 308, 53 Okla. 315, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 403

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 14, 1916

Docket7903

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1916 OK 342 (Fink v. Cheyenne Short Line R.) 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

Fink v. Cheyenne Short Line R., 1916 OK 342, 155 P. 308, 53 Okla. 315, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 403 (Okla. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On September 17, 1915, the district court of Roger Mills county appointed a receiver for the Cheyenne Short Line Railroad Company, and on June 14, 1915, plaintiffs in error filed their motion to vacate said order of appointment, which motion was on that day overruled, and plaintiffs in error were allowed sixty days in which to prepare and serve a case-made, and defendants in error were given twenty days thereafter in which to suggest amendments; the case-made to be settled upon five days’ notice. The case-made was served on defendants in error on August 14, and filed in this court December 11, 1915. The cause is now before us on motion of defendants in error to dismiss, because the appeal was not perfected within the time fixed by law.

This identical question was passed- upon in Lamb v. Alexander, 45 Okla. 573, 146 Pac. 443, where in the sylla *316 bus we said: “Under section 4986, Rev. Laws 1910, appeal from an interlocutory order appointing a receiver or refusing to vacate the appointment of a receiver must he taken within ten.days from the date of the order appealed from, by filing a petition in error in this court within said time limit.” The law there stated controls this case, and this appeal should be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

On September 17, 1915, the district court of Roger Mills county appointed a receiver for the Cheyenne Short Line Railroad Company, and on June 14, 1915, plaintiffs in error filed their motion to vacate said order of appointment, which motion was on that day overruled, and plaintiffs in error were allowed sixty days in which to prepare and serve a case-made, and defendants in error were given twenty days thereafter in which to suggest amendments; the case-made to be settled upon five days’ notice. The case-made was served on defendants in error on August 14, and filed in this court December 11, 1915. The cause is now before us on motion of defendants in error to dismiss, because the appeal was not perfected within the time fixed by law.

This identical question was passed- upon in Lamb v. Alexander, 45 Okla. 573, 146 Pac. 443, where in the sylla *316 bus we said: “Under section 4986, Rev. Laws 1910, appeal from an interlocutory order appointing a receiver or refusing to vacate the appointment of a receiver must he taken within ten.days from the date of the order appealed from, by filing a petition in error in this court within said time limit.” The law there stated controls this case, and this appeal should be dismissed.

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1916 OK 342, 155 P. 308, 53 Okla. 315, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 403, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fink-v-cheyenne-short-line-r-okla-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack