Hill v. City of Kingfisher

1913 OK 656, 136 P. 775, 39 Okla. 782, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 587
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided November 18, 1913·No. 3176·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

ROBERTSON, C.

This appeal was filed in this court October 14, 1911. Neither party has filed a brief, nor have they offered any excuse for the failure to do so. It is evident that the proceedings have been abandoned. The appeal should therefore be dismissed for want of prosecution tinder rule 7 of this court (38 Okla. vi, 95 Pac. vi). Streeter v. McCoy, 34 Okla. 490, 126 Pac. 216; Thompson v. Murray, 34 Okla. 521, 125 Pac. 1133; Streeter v. Huene, 34 Okla. 491, 126 Pac. 216; Reliable Ins. Co. v. Newcomber, 34 Okla. 759, 127 Pac. 260; M., O. & G. Ry. Co. v. Johnson, 34 Okla. 816, 127 Pac. 386; First Nat. Bank v. Baldwin, 34 Okla. 825, 127 Pac. 260; Snow v. Frye, 34 Okla. 826, 127 Pac. 422.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Hill v. City of Kingfisher, 1913 OK 656, 136 P. 775, 39 Okla. 782, 1913 Okla. LEXIS 587 (Okla. 1913).

1913 OK 656 (Hill v. City of Kingfisher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Thompson v. Murray
1912 OK 554 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
First Nat. Bank of Okemah v. Baldwin
1912 OK 624 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Streeter v. McCoy
1912 OK 551 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Streeter v. Huene
126 P. 216 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Reliable Ins. Co. v. Newcomber
1912 OK 648 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Missouri, O. & G. Ry. Co. v. Johnson
1912 OK 643 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)
Snow v. Frye
1912 OK 651 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1912)