Orcutt v. Orcutt

1910 OK 84, 108 P. 373, 25 Okla. 855, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 349
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMarch 8, 1910
Docket411
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 1910 OK 84 (Orcutt v. Orcutt) 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
Orcutt v. Orcutt, 1910 OK 84, 108 P. 373, 25 Okla. 855, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 349 (Okla. 1910).

Opinion

DuNN, C. J.

This is an action for divorce, brought in the district court of Wagoner county by the defendant in error, through her next friend, against plaintiff in error. From a decree of that court granting defendant in error a divorce, the plaintiff in error has attempted to appeal.

Section 6180 of the Compiled Laws of Oklahoma, 1909, provides :

* * * A party, desiring to appeal from a judgment granting a divorce, must within ten days after such judgment is rendered file a written notice in the office of the clerk of such court, duly entitled in such action, stating that it is the intention of such party to appeal from such judgment and unless such notice' be filed no appeal shall be made or taken in such cause. * * *”

The notice thus provided for is jurisdictional, and this court in the case of La Due v. La Due, 23 Okla. 323, 100 Pac. 513, said:

*856 “Where^ on appeal from a judgment granting a divorce, plaintiff in error has failed to hie, within ten days after the rendition of such judgment, written notice of his intention to appeal, in the office of the clerk of the court in which the judgment was rendered, as prescribed be section 4840, Wilson’s Rev. & Ann. St. Okla. 1903 (section 6180, Comp. Laws Okla. 1909), this court is without jurisdiction to hear and determine the appeal, and the same will be dismissed.”

While we are without jurisdiction to entertain this cause by reason of the lack of the notice above mentioned, we will say that we have carefully read the briefs of.the parties, along with the entire record, and to our minds the situation presented would not justify a reversal of the judgment of the lower court.

The cause is dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

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

Related

Jupe v. Jupe
1946 OK 10 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1946)
Butler v. Butler
1927 OK 53 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Reynolds v. Reynolds
1923 OK 735 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
Vogt v. Vogt
1923 OK 379 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1923)
Montgomery v. Montgomery
1914 OK 95 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1914)
Rogers v. Rogers
1913 OK 341 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1913)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1910 OK 84, 108 P. 373, 25 Okla. 855, 1910 Okla. LEXIS 349, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/orcutt-v-orcutt-okla-1910.