Turrell v. Continental Oil Company

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Turrell v. Continental Oil Company

1970 OK 19, 466 P.2d 643, 1970 Okla. LEXIS 285

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 27, 1970

Docket43887

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 1970 OK 19 (Turrell v. Continental Oil Company) 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

Turrell v. Continental Oil Company, 1970 OK 19, 466 P.2d 643, 1970 Okla. LEXIS 285 (Okla. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

BERRY, Vice Chief Justice.

This appeal seeks review of a judgment granted September 26, 1969, as to which motion for new trial was denied October 17, 1969. Defendant in error has moved to dismiss, urging petition in error was filed on November 18, 1969, a day more than thirty days after October 17, 1969, and consequently not within the period prescribed by 12 O.S.Supp.1968, § 990.

In response to this motion plaintiff in error has filed an affidavit executed by the secretary in the office of counsel for plaintiff in error, to the effect petition in error was by her mailed to the clerk of this court on November 14, 1969, properly addressed.

November 16, 1969, the thirtieth day following October 17, 1969, fell on Sunday. The last day for commencement of appellate proceedings in this case was November 17, 1969. 12 O.S.1961, §§ 73 and 82. Mailing a petition in error in a cover addressed to the clerk of this court, postage prepaid, within time believed to be required for delivery does not constitute compliance with 12 O.S.Supp. 1968, § 990. Home Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Rounds-Porter Lumber Co., 80 Okl. 201, 206, 195 P. 479, 483; Reed v. Moore, Okl., 386 P.2d 763, 765. The cited decisions deal with other and former periods of limitation for commencement of appellate proceedings. However, the principles there declared remain wholly applicable to this factual situation.

The appeal accordingly is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

All Justices concur.

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

BERRY, Vice Chief Justice.

This appeal seeks review of a judgment granted September 26, 1969, as to which motion for new trial was denied October 17, 1969. Defendant in error has moved to dismiss, urging petition in error was filed on November 18, 1969, a day more than thirty days after October 17, 1969, and consequently not within the period prescribed by 12 O.S.Supp.1968, § 990.

In response to this motion plaintiff in error has filed an affidavit executed by the secretary in the office of counsel for plaintiff in error, to the effect petition in error was by her mailed to the clerk of this court on November 14, 1969, properly addressed.

November 16, 1969, the thirtieth day following October 17, 1969, fell on Sunday. The last day for commencement of appellate proceedings in this case was November 17, 1969. 12 O.S.1961, §§ 73 and 82. Mailing a petition in error in a cover addressed to the clerk of this court, postage prepaid, within time believed to be required for delivery does not constitute compliance with 12 O.S.Supp. 1968, § 990. Home Savings & Loan Ass’n v. Rounds-Porter Lumber Co., 80 Okl. 201, 206, 195 P. 479, 483; Reed v. Moore, Okl., 386 P.2d 763, 765. The cited decisions deal with other and former periods of limitation for commencement of appellate proceedings. However, the principles there declared remain wholly applicable to this factual situation.

The appeal accordingly is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

All Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1970 OK 19, 466 P.2d 643, 1970 Okla. LEXIS 285, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/turrell-v-continental-oil-company-okla-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack