Summary
In Manning v. Stroud State Bank, 26 Okla. 625, 110 P. 650, the trial court rendered judgment on the pleadings at a time when there was on file an unverified answer, denying the execution of the note sued on, but which answer was sworn to before the clerk of the court on the day of trial, but without leave of the court having first been obtained.
Summary of this case from Stauffer et al. v. CampbellOpinion
No. 519
Opinion Filed July 12, 1910.
PLEADING — Unauthorized Verification — Judgment on Pleadings. An unverified answer embodying a plea of non est factum having been filed and on the day the case was set for trial, but before it was called for trial, the defendant, without having first obtained leave of the court, having verified the answer before the clerk of the court, the plaintiff without moving to strike the answer from the file moved for judgment on the pleadings, which was granted by the court. Held, that this was error.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from District Court, Lincoln County; W. N. Maben, Judge.
Action by the Stroud State Bank against P. C. Manning. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Reversed.
M. D. Owen, G. A. Neeley, and W. Jones, for plaintiff in error.
Hoffman Robertson and Charles B. Wilson, Jr., for defendant in error.
Did the court err in rendering judgment upon the pleadings, it appearing that the answer at the time it was filed, unverified, denied the execution of the note sued on, but was sworn to by the defendant before the clerk of the court on the day the case was called for trial, without first having obtained leave of court thereto? No motion was made to strike the answer from the files on account of such improper verification. As long as the answer remained on file verified, though without permission of the court, it was error to render judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant on the pleadings. 22 Ency. Pl. Pr. p. 1048.
The judgment of the lower court is reversed and remanded, with instructions to grant a new trial.
All the Justices concur.