In Re Determination of Heirship of Isparhecher Sarwarhie

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

In Re Determination of Heirship of Isparhecher Sarwarhie

1922 OK 77, 205 P. 133, 85 Okla. 186, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 60

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 7, 1922

Docket12872

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1922 OK 77 (In Re Determination of Heirship of Isparhecher Sarwarhie) 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

In Re Determination of Heirship of Isparhecher Sarwarhie, 1922 OK 77, 205 P. 133, 85 Okla. 186, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 60 (Okla. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

NICHOLSON, J.

This cause was tried in the district court of Okmulgee county, on appeal from the county court of said county. The motion for new trial was overruled on June 1, 1921, and on that day the appellants, R. L. A. Steigleder and others, were given 90 days within which to prepare and serve ease-made. On July 29, 1921, the court made an order of further extension of 60 days from that date within which to make and serve case-made; on September 29, 1921, the court made another order of extension of 15 days from that date within which to make and serve case-made, and within the time allowed by the last order the case-made was served upon the appellees. The appel-lees have filed their motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the case-made was not served within the time allowed by a valid order of the trial court.

The order of extension made by the court on July 29, 1921, expired on September 27, 1921; -therefore the trial court was without jurisdiction to make the order of September 29, 1921, and such order was a nullity, and the case-made which was made and served under said order i's a nullity and conferred no jurisdiction upon this court.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained, and the appeal dismissed.

HARRISON, O. J., and PITCHFORD, MC-NEILL, and ELTING, JJ., concur.

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

NICHOLSON, J.

This cause was tried in the district court of Okmulgee county, on appeal from the county court of said county. The motion for new trial was overruled on June 1, 1921, and on that day the appellants, R. L. A. Steigleder and others, were given 90 days within which to prepare and serve ease-made. On July 29, 1921, the court made an order of further extension of 60 days from that date within which to make and serve case-made; on September 29, 1921, the court made another order of extension of 15 days from that date within which to make and serve case-made, and within the time allowed by the last order the case-made was served upon the appellees. The appel-lees have filed their motion to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the case-made was not served within the time allowed by a valid order of the trial court.

The order of extension made by the court on July 29, 1921, expired on September 27, 1921; -therefore the trial court was without jurisdiction to make the order of September 29, 1921, and such order was a nullity, and the case-made which was made and served under said order i's a nullity and conferred no jurisdiction upon this court.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained, and the appeal dismissed.

HARRISON, O. J., and PITCHFORD, MC-NEILL, and ELTING, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1922 OK 77, 205 P. 133, 85 Okla. 186, 1922 Okla. LEXIS 60, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-determination-of-heirship-of-isparhecher-sarwarhie-okla-1922.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack