Jones v. Tull
1915 OK 446, 149 P. 1189, 48 Okla. 91, 1915 Okla. LEXIS 587
Opinion
Opinion by
The petition in error and the transcript of the record in this case was filed in this court on December 4, 1912; 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 judgment of the trial court should, therefore, be affirmed, under rule 7 of this court (38 Okla. vi, 137 Pac. ix). Nicholson v. Barnes, 42 Okla. 250, 140 Pac. 1155.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Jones v. Tull, 1915 OK 446, 149 P. 1189, 48 Okla. 91, 1915 Okla. LEXIS 587 (Okla. 1915).
1915 OK 446 (Jones v. Tull) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Nicholson v. Barnes
1914 OK 233 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)