From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

First State Bank of Warner v. Porter

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Jan 30, 1917
182 P. 672 (Okla. 1917)

Opinion

No. 8505

Opinion Filed January 30, 1917.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Appeal and Error — Time for Appeal — Dismissal.

Proceeding in error dismissed for the reason that same was not commenced within six months from the rendition of the judgment complained of, as required by chapter 18, Sess. Laws 1910-11.

Error from Superior Court, Muskogee County; H.C. Thurman, Judge.

Action between the First State Bank of Warner and S.T. Porter. From the judgment, the former brings error. Dismissed.

Ambrister Ambrister, for plaintiff in error.

Neff Neff, for defendant in error.


This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to dismiss the proceeding in error, upon the ground, among others, that the same was not commenced within the time provided by law. The record shows that the appeal was taken from a judgment rendered on the 12th day of February, 1916, and an order overruling the motion for new trial therein, which was entered on the first day of April, 1916. No summons in error has been issued or served up to this time. It, therefore, appears that the proceeding in error was not commenced within the time required by chapter 18, Sess. Laws 1910-11, which provides:

"All proceedings for reversing, vacating and modifying judgments or final orders shall be commenced within six months from the rendition of the judgment or final order complained of."

The proceeding in error, therefore, must be dismissed upon the authority of Shelton v. Wallace, 63 Okla. 79, 162 P. 1092.

All the Justices concur.


Summaries of

First State Bank of Warner v. Porter

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Jan 30, 1917
182 P. 672 (Okla. 1917)
Case details for

First State Bank of Warner v. Porter

Case Details

Full title:FIRST STATE BANK OF WARNER v. PORTER

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Jan 30, 1917

Citations

182 P. 672 (Okla. 1917)
182 P. 672

Citing Cases

State v. Smith

The consequences of a valid insanity defense with respect to confinement, treatment and discharge, if to be…

State v. Sexton

Notwithstanding the brutal and senseless nature of the offense committed in this case, we must not forget…