King v. Osgood

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

King v. Osgood

1936 OK 710, 62 P.2d 485, 178 Okla. 189, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 929

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 10, 1936

DocketNo. 27155.

StatusPublished

This text of 1936 OK 710 (King v. Osgood) 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

King v. Osgood, 1936 OK 710, 62 P.2d 485, 178 Okla. 189, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 929 (Okla. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On- the 19th day of October, 1935', the plaintiffs filed a petition for injunctive relief against FTank Osgood and Eli Dry, the latter being the sheriff of Ottawa county, to enjoin execution of an award made by the State Industrial Commission to the said Frank Osgood, which award had become final and had been filed in Ottawa county as provided by law. A demurrer was sustained to plaintiffs’ petition, and they prosecuted an appeal therefrom, and thereafter, on April 26, 1936, and during the pendency of this appeal, Frank Osgood died. In the case at bar the death of Frank Osgood, for whose benefit execution is issued, abates the judgment until revived. The sheriff could not proceed to execute the judgment in favor of Frank Osgood at this time. There must be- a revivor on behalf of the properly authorized representatives denominated by the statute in whose favor the final award survives. We are of the opinion, therefore, and hold, that the question has become moot, and the appeal is dismissed.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. C. J., and BUSBY, PHELPS, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur. RILEY, ¡BAYLESS, and WELCH, JJ., absent.

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

PER CURIAM.

On- the 19th day of October, 1935', the plaintiffs filed a petition for injunctive relief against FTank Osgood and Eli Dry, the latter being the sheriff of Ottawa county, to enjoin execution of an award made by the State Industrial Commission to the said Frank Osgood, which award had become final and had been filed in Ottawa county as provided by law. A demurrer was sustained to plaintiffs’ petition, and they prosecuted an appeal therefrom, and thereafter, on April 26, 1936, and during the pendency of this appeal, Frank Osgood died. In the case at bar the death of Frank Osgood, for whose benefit execution is issued, abates the judgment until revived. The sheriff could not proceed to execute the judgment in favor of Frank Osgood at this time. There must be- a revivor on behalf of the properly authorized representatives denominated by the statute in whose favor the final award survives. We are of the opinion, therefore, and hold, that the question has become moot, and the appeal is dismissed.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. C. J., and BUSBY, PHELPS, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur. RILEY, ¡BAYLESS, and WELCH, JJ., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1936 OK 710, 62 P.2d 485, 178 Okla. 189, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 929, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/king-v-osgood-okla-1936.