City of Enidv.McCann

Supreme Court of OklahomaOct 9, 1917
67 Okla. 68 (Okla. 1917)

Cases citing this document

How cited

  • Ranney-Davis Merc. Co. v. Morris

    This court, in the cases of Reed v. Walcott, 40 Okla. 451, 139 P. 318; Memphis Steel Const. Co. v.…

  • Kolb v. Hightower

    They served it on the 18th day of July, 1929. Under the provisions of that order the plaintiff had three days…

5 Citing cases

No. 9382

Opinion Filed October 9, 1917. Rehearing Denied November 20, 1917.


Appeal and Error — Case-Made — Amendments — Time.

The time within which to suggest amendments to a case-made begins to run from the expiration of the time allowed Within which to serve same, and not from the actual service, thereof; and a case-made, signed and settled before the expiration of the time to suggest amendments, is a nullity.

Error from District Court, Garfield County; James B. Cullison, Judge.

Action between the City of Enid and Lillian L. McCann. Judgment for the latter, and the former brings error. Dismissed.

Chalmers B. Wilson, for plaintiff in error.

Charles N. Harmon, M.C. Garber, and P.T. McVay, for defendant in error.

Defendant in error moves to dismiss the appeal in this case for the reason that an order was entered in the lower court extending the time for the service of case-made until July 1, 1917, and providing that plaintiff be given ten days after service of case-made for suggesting amendments, same to be settled on five days' notice. The case-made was actually served on June 18, 1917, and signed and settled on notice on July 6, 1917. It is urged by plaintiff in error that the time in which to suggest amendments began to run from the date of service, June 18th, and not from July 1st, the expiration of the time in which to serve the case-made. This case is ruled by the cases of Sov. Camp of W. O. W. v. Chumley, 58 Okla. 681, 161 P. 1175, and Frey v. McCune, 52 Okla. 648, 153 P. 109, and the motion must be sustained.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

All the Justices concur.