Simmons v. Lauffer

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Simmons v. Lauffer

1911 OK 238, 116 P. 943, 29 Okla. 132, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 258

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJune 27, 1911

Docket999

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1911 OK 238 (Simmons v. Lauffer) 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

Simmons v. Lauffer, 1911 OK 238, 116 P. 943, 29 Okla. 132, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 258 (Okla. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

DUNN, J.

This case presents error from the county court of Wagoner county, and was filed in this court July 30, 1909, to secure a review of a judgment of that court dated August 22, 1908'. May 8, 1911, counsel for defendant in error filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding for the reason that no summons in error had to that date been served upon defendant in error or on his attorney of record, and no waiver thereof nor general appearance had been made and more than one year had elapsed since the filing of the appeal. The records of this court disclose that on October 8, 1909, a praecipe was filed and summons is *133 sued, which was returned October 23, 1909, showing defendant not found. On November 12, 1909, a praecipe for an alias summons was filed, and the alias summons issued, which was returned on November 19, 1909, also showing that defendant was not found. Under these circumstances, under the authority of Hartsell v. Edwards et al., (ante) 116 Pac. 942, an opinon of this •court handed down at this term, and a uniform line of authorities, the motion is sustained and the action dismissed.

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 county court of Wagoner county, and was filed in this court July 30, 1909, to secure a review of a judgment of that court dated August 22, 1908'. May 8, 1911, counsel for defendant in error filed a motion to dismiss the proceeding for the reason that no summons in error had to that date been served upon defendant in error or on his attorney of record, and no waiver thereof nor general appearance had been made and more than one year had elapsed since the filing of the appeal. The records of this court disclose that on October 8, 1909, a praecipe was filed and summons is *133 sued, which was returned October 23, 1909, showing defendant not found. On November 12, 1909, a praecipe for an alias summons was filed, and the alias summons issued, which was returned on November 19, 1909, also showing that defendant was not found. Under these circumstances, under the authority of Hartsell v. Edwards et al., (ante) 116 Pac. 942, an opinon of this •court handed down at this term, and a uniform line of authorities, the motion is sustained and the action dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1911 OK 238, 116 P. 943, 29 Okla. 132, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 258, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simmons-v-lauffer-okla-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack