Harkins v. McPhail

1920 OK 14, 187 P. 222, 77 Okla. 162, 1920 Okla. LEXIS 215
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided January 13, 1920·No. 10986·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

KANE, J.

The facts alleged in defendants in error’s motion to dismiss are that the purported case-made filed herein and attached to the petition in error was not signed and settled and allowed in the manner provided by law, for the reason that defendants in error did not receive any notice of the time and place of the purported settlement of the case-made, and were not present at the time of such purported settlement; nor was notice of the time and place of settlement waived, or suggestions of amendments to said case-made offered.

These facts are sufficient for dismissal. First National Bank of Collinsville v. Daniels, 26 Okla. 383, 108 Pac. 748; Richardson v. Thompson, 33 Okla. 120, 124 Pac. 64; School District No. 18, Creek County, v. Griffith et al., 33 Okla. 625, 127 Pac. 258; Cobb & Co. et al. v. Hancock, 31 Okla. 42, 119 Pac. 627; Southwestern Surety Insurance Co. v. Going et al., 48 Okla. 460, 150 Pac. 488; Wood *163 er al. v. King, 49 Okla. 98, 151 Pac. 685; Guymon Electric Light and Power Co. v. Spiers, 73 Oklahoma, 175 Pac. 347.

The motion to dismiss is sustained.

RAINEY, V. C. J., and JOHNSON, PITCH-EORD, McNEILL, and HIGGINS, JJ., concur; BAILEY, J., disqualified, not participating.

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

Harkins v. McPhail, 1920 OK 14, 187 P. 222, 77 Okla. 162, 1920 Okla. LEXIS 215 (Okla. 1920).

1920 OK 14 (Harkins v. McPhail) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Samuel Dodsworth Book Co. v. Fulcher
1920 OK 356 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1920)
Sterling v. Boucher
1920 OK 254 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1920)