Prusa v. Dolezal

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Prusa v. Dolezal

1952 OK 379, 249 P.2d 1015, 207 Okla. 373, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 801

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 5, 1952

DocketNo. 35613

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1952 OK 379 (Prusa v. Dolezal) 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

Prusa v. Dolezal, 1952 OK 379, 249 P.2d 1015, 207 Okla. 373, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 801 (Okla. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

WELCH, J.

On the 14th day of January, 1952, the trial court overruled a motion for new trial in this case in which judgment had been entered for defendant in an action by plaintiffs on a former judgment. Thereafter there were orders of extension of time in which to make and serve the case-made. The appeal was filed in this court on July 12, 1952.

There was no attempt to obtain an order in which to extend the time to file the appeal in this court until June 11, 1952. A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason the appeal was not filed within the statutory three months provided by 12 O.S. 1951 §972, or an extension of time within said three months. The motion must be sustained. Adams v. Hobbs, 204 Okla. 85, 226 P. 2d 913; Sheets v. Sheets, 204 Okla. 88, 226 P. 2d 915; East Side Baptist Church v. Morgan, 204 Okla. 685, 233 P. 2d 957; Schuler v. State ex rel. Coryell, 205 Okla. 212, 236 P. 2d 672.

Appeal dismissed.

HALLEY, V. C. J., and CORN, GIBSON, DAVISON, JOHNSON, O’NEAL, and BINGAMAN, JJ., concur.

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

WELCH, J.

On the 14th day of January, 1952, the trial court overruled a motion for new trial in this case in which judgment had been entered for defendant in an action by plaintiffs on a former judgment. Thereafter there were orders of extension of time in which to make and serve the case-made. The appeal was filed in this court on July 12, 1952.

There was no attempt to obtain an order in which to extend the time to file the appeal in this court until June 11, 1952. A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason the appeal was not filed within the statutory three months provided by 12 O.S. 1951 §972, or an extension of time within said three months. The motion must be sustained. Adams v. Hobbs, 204 Okla. 85, 226 P. 2d 913; Sheets v. Sheets, 204 Okla. 88, 226 P. 2d 915; East Side Baptist Church v. Morgan, 204 Okla. 685, 233 P. 2d 957; Schuler v. State ex rel. Coryell, 205 Okla. 212, 236 P. 2d 672.

Appeal dismissed.

HALLEY, V. C. J., and CORN, GIBSON, DAVISON, JOHNSON, O’NEAL, and BINGAMAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1952 OK 379, 249 P.2d 1015, 207 Okla. 373, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 801, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/prusa-v-dolezal-okla-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack