International Supply Co. v. Wood-Watson MacHine Works

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

International Supply Co. v. Wood-Watson MacHine Works

1936 OK 27, 53 P.2d 554, 175 Okla. 505

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 14, 1936

DocketNo. 26711.

StatusPublished

This text of 1936 OK 27 (International Supply Co. v. Wood-Watson MacHine Works) 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

International Supply Co. v. Wood-Watson MacHine Works, 1936 OK 27, 53 P.2d 554, 175 Okla. 505 (Okla. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by transcript. The final order from which the appeal is taken was entered April 4, 1935. Thereafter plaintiff in error filed a motion for new trial which was overruled on April 30, 1935. A motion to dismiss has been filed under the familiar rule that the appeal must he taken within six months from the date of the judgment rendered for the reason that motions for new trial and rulings made thereon are not a part of the record unless Incorporated in a case-made or bill of exceptions and presented to this court; and that where no case-made is served or bill of exceptions taken, the date to appeal expires six months from the date of the rendition of the original judgment. Richardson v. Beidleman, 33 Okla. 463, 126 P. 818; Chase v. Byrnes, 147 Okla. 118, 294 P. 786: In re Welfelt’s Estate, 142 Okla. 110, 285 P. 843.

A response has been filed in which it is 'stated that on the 30th day of April, 1935, *506 and on the date of the entering of the order overruling motion for new trial, the court' on application of the appellant herein modified and corrected the journal entry of judgment. Under the decisions of this court, such correction is made upon application after judgment and is not a part of the record. McCarthy v. Bentley, 16 Okla. 19, 83 P. 713; McCoy v. McCoy, 27 Okla. 371, 112 P. 1040. The appeal not having been taken within six months from the date of the rendition of the judgment on April 4, 1935, the cause must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. ü. J., and RILEY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by transcript. The final order from which the appeal is taken was entered April 4, 1935. Thereafter plaintiff in error filed a motion for new trial which was overruled on April 30, 1935. A motion to dismiss has been filed under the familiar rule that the appeal must he taken within six months from the date of the judgment rendered for the reason that motions for new trial and rulings made thereon are not a part of the record unless Incorporated in a case-made or bill of exceptions and presented to this court; and that where no case-made is served or bill of exceptions taken, the date to appeal expires six months from the date of the rendition of the original judgment. Richardson v. Beidleman, 33 Okla. 463, 126 P. 818; Chase v. Byrnes, 147 Okla. 118, 294 P. 786: In re Welfelt’s Estate, 142 Okla. 110, 285 P. 843.

A response has been filed in which it is 'stated that on the 30th day of April, 1935, *506 and on the date of the entering of the order overruling motion for new trial, the court' on application of the appellant herein modified and corrected the journal entry of judgment. Under the decisions of this court, such correction is made upon application after judgment and is not a part of the record. McCarthy v. Bentley, 16 Okla. 19, 83 P. 713; McCoy v. McCoy, 27 Okla. 371, 112 P. 1040. The appeal not having been taken within six months from the date of the rendition of the judgment on April 4, 1935, the cause must be dismissed, and it is so ordered.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. ü. J., and RILEY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1936 OK 27, 53 P.2d 554, 175 Okla. 505, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-supply-co-v-wood-watson-machine-works-okla-1936.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack