Milam v. Milam
1919 OK 273, 184 P. 445, 76 Okla. 62, 1919 Okla. LEXIS 124
Opinion
It appears on motion to dismiss this action that plaintiff in error failed to commence proceedings in this court within four months from the date of the decree appealed from as required by section 4971, Rev. Laws 1910. The motion to dismiss the appeal must be sustained. Linkugel v. Linkugel, 74 Oklahoma, 183 Pac. 55; Callahan v. Callahan, 47 Okla. 542, 149 Pac. 135.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Milam v. Milam, 1919 OK 273, 184 P. 445, 76 Okla. 62, 1919 Okla. LEXIS 124 (Okla. 1919).
1919 OK 273 (Milam v. Milam) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Jordan River Restoration Network
2012 UT 84 (Utah Supreme Court, 2012)
Oven v. Ausley
143 So. 588 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1932)
City of Alva v. Mason
1931 OK 364 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1931)
Allen v. Board of Com'rs of Logan County
1928 OK 345 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1928)
Butler v. Butler
1927 OK 53 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Finnell v. Finnell
1924 OK 1051 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1924)
City of Bartlesville v. Keeler
1924 OK 767 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1924)
Reynolds v. Reynolds
1923 OK 735 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
Vogt v. Vogt
1923 OK 379 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
O'Farrell v. County of Sonoma
208 P. 117 (California Supreme Court, 1922)