Murphy v. Taylor

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Murphy v. Taylor

1912 OK 55, 121 P. 1077, 31 Okla. 285, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 50

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 9, 1912

Docket3065

StatusPublished

This text of 1912 OK 55 (Murphy v. Taylor) 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

Murphy v. Taylor, 1912 OK 55, 121 P. 1077, 31 Okla. 285, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 50 (Okla. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

DUNN, J.

This case presents error from the superior court of Muskogee county, and was filed in this court on September 20, 1911. November 28, 1911, counsel for defendant in error filed a motion to strike the case-made and dismiss the appeal for the rea *286 son that the case-made was not served within the time fixed and allowed by the court, nor, as it developed, within a time lawfully extended within the time granted. The assignments of error which are made are those only which could be raised upon the denial .of a motion for a new trial, to present which it is necessary that'a case-made'or bill of exceptions duly prepared be submitted to support. The motion for new trial in this case was denied on March 25, 1911, at which time the court granted an extension of 60 days within which to prepare and serve a' case-made. The case-made which is before us appears not to have been served within the time so extended, nor was any order extending the time made within such time, and, according to a uniform course of decisions of this court, the motion must be sustained. See Soliss v. Davis, 28 Okla. 496, 114 Pac. 609; London & Lancashire Lire Ins. Co. v. Cummings et al., 23 Okla. 126, 99 Pac. 654, and authorities therein cited.

All the Justices concur.

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

DUNN, J.

This case presents error from the superior court of Muskogee county, and was filed in this court on September 20, 1911. November 28, 1911, counsel for defendant in error filed a motion to strike the case-made and dismiss the appeal for the rea *286 son that the case-made was not served within the time fixed and allowed by the court, nor, as it developed, within a time lawfully extended within the time granted. The assignments of error which are made are those only which could be raised upon the denial .of a motion for a new trial, to present which it is necessary that'a case-made'or bill of exceptions duly prepared be submitted to support. The motion for new trial in this case was denied on March 25, 1911, at which time the court granted an extension of 60 days within which to prepare and serve a' case-made. The case-made which is before us appears not to have been served within the time so extended, nor was any order extending the time made within such time, and, according to a uniform course of decisions of this court, the motion must be sustained. See Soliss v. Davis, 28 Okla. 496, 114 Pac. 609; London & Lancashire Lire Ins. Co. v. Cummings et al., 23 Okla. 126, 99 Pac. 654, and authorities therein cited.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1912 OK 55, 121 P. 1077, 31 Okla. 285, 1912 Okla. LEXIS 50, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murphy-v-taylor-okla-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack