Jones v. Montgomery

1929 OK 220, 278 P. 266, 137 Okla. 16, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 389
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 28, 1929
Docket19169
StatusPublished

This text of 1929 OK 220 (Jones v. Montgomery) 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
Jones v. Montgomery, 1929 OK 220, 278 P. 266, 137 Okla. 16, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 389 (Okla. 1929).

Opinion

HALL, C.

This was an action to recover on a redelivery bond given in a replevin action. The cause was tried and judgment was rendered on September 6, 1927. The plaintiff prevailed. A demurrer to the answer of defendants was sustained, and the defendants elected to stand upon their d'e-murr'er. Therefore, no motion for new trial was necessary. On that date, September 6, 1927, notice of appeal was regularly given, and a period of 60 days was fixed in which defendant might make and serve a case-made.

On November 7, 1927, an order attempting to extend the time in which to serve a case-made was granted. The order purported to extend the time for a period of 60 days. The order is r'egular in all respects, except that it was made two days after the expiration of the time fixed in the previous order for making and serving the case-made. The. case-made was served under the last order.

The first question addressed to us i» a motion of the defendant in error to dismiss the appeal, for the reason that the case-made was not made and served within the time provided by a valid order of the trial court.

By reason of an unbroken line of decisions of this court, the trial court, after November 5, 1927, lost jurisdiction to make an order extending the time in which to Serve the case-made in this case, and the order or purported order made on November 7. 1927. was a nullity; and for such reason it necessarily follows that the appeal will have to be dismissed.

The appeal is dismissed.

BENNETT, HERR, JEFFREY, and DIF-FENDAFFER, Commissioners, concur.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Note.—See under (1) 2 R. C. L. p. 159; 1 Perm. Supp. p. 352. See “Appeal and Error,” 4 C. J. §1991, p. 350, n. 2.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1929 OK 220, 278 P. 266, 137 Okla. 16, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-montgomery-okla-1929.