Helms v. Faulkner

1920 OK 342, 193 P. 621, 79 Okla. 308, 1920 Okla. LEXIS 115
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided November 16, 1920·No. 11808·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

HARRISON, J.

This appeal was perfected and filed in this court October 4, 1920. On October 25, 1920, defendants in error filed a motion to dismiss appeal.

Notice of said motion was duly served upon plaintiff in error and service of same duly accepted, October 25, 1920. .

Several grounds are relied upon by defendants in error for a dismissal of the appeal, but the following grounds being fatal, it becomes unnecessary to determine the other grounds relied upon.

The following grounds, to wit: (1) That said case-made is not certified by the court clerk as required by law; (2) that said ease-made was not attested, sealed, and filed as required by law — are sufficient to sustain the motion to dismiss.

The case-made filed herein does not contain the certificate of the court clerk that same is a full, true, and correct transcript of the record of said cause.

Nor is the certificate of the trial judge to such case-made, attested by the court clerk as required by law.

Upon authority of Walker v. Walker, 54 Okla. 666, 154 Pac. 512, and the line of decisions of this court therein relied upon, the motion to dismiss appeal is sustained, and the appeal'dismissed.

RAINEY, C. J., and PITOHFORD, KANE, mcneill, higgins, bailey, johnson, and COLLIER, JJ., concur.

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

Helms v. Faulkner, 1920 OK 342, 193 P. 621, 79 Okla. 308, 1920 Okla. LEXIS 115 (Okla. 1920).

1920 OK 342 (Helms v. Faulkner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Ex Rel. Freeling v. Brewer
1923 OK 888 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
Hall v. Phoenix Ins. Co.
1921 OK 229 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1921)