First Nat. Bank of McAlester v. McIntosh

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

First Nat. Bank of McAlester v. McIntosh

1925 OK 276, 237 P. 443, 113 Okla. 15, 1925 Okla. LEXIS 857

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedApril 7, 1925

Docket16140

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 1925 OK 276 (First Nat. Bank of McAlester v. McIntosh) 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

First Nat. Bank of McAlester v. McIntosh, 1925 OK 276, 237 P. 443, 113 Okla. 15, 1925 Okla. LEXIS 857 (Okla. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by petition in error and transcript to review an order of the trial court vacating the appointment of a receiver in a foreclosure proceeding.

Defendant in error has filed a motion to dismiss the proceedings in error upon the ground that the order sought to be reviewed is no part of the record, and therefore the error assigned cannot be presented by transcript.

This court has repeatedly held that motions in the trial court and rulings thereon are not properly a- part of the record, and can be presented for review only by incorporation into a bill of exceptions or ease-made.

In Whitaker v. Chestnutt, 65 Okla. Í22, 165 Pac. 160, it was held :

“Order of the court on a motion to vacate a judgment is not a oart of the record proper and cannot be reviewed by this court on petition in error and transcript.”

In Lamb v. Young 24 Okla. 614, 104 Pac. 335, it was said:

“A motion to discharge property from an attachment is not a part of the record, unless made so by bill of exceptions or case-made.”

1 Upon these authorities the appeal is dismissed.

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