TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Anderson v. Limerick

ANDERSON Et Al. v. LIMERICK Et Al.

Anderson v. Limerick, 1914 OK 426, 143 P. 183
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
September 22, 1914
Docket
No. 6560
Judges
Turner
Citations
143 P. 1831914 OK 42643 Okla. 4841914 Okla. LEXIS 551
Disposition
Chas. H. Garnett, for plaintiffs in error.
Syllabus
APPEAL AND! ERROR — Time of Taking Appeal. Under chapter 18, p. 35, Sess. Laws 1910-11, proceeding in error in the Supreme Court must be brought within six months from the date of the rendition of the judgment or order from which the appeal is sought to be taken, and, when not so brought, this court is without jurisdiction, and the same will be dismissed. (Syllabus by the Court.)
Summary
Error from County Court, Oklahoma County; John W. Hay son, Judge. Action by Della Limerick and others’against George H. Anderson and W. F. Bland. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants bring error. Dismissed.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Turner

TURNER, J.

This cause is before us on motion of defendants in error to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the case-made and petition in error were not filed in this court within six months after the rendition of the judgment or final order complained of. The record discloses that judgment was rendered on May 16, 1913; motion for new trial was duly filed and overruled by the trial court on June 23, 1913. The case-made was not filed in this court until June 23, 1914. Chapter 18, p. 35, Session Laws 1910-11, requiring appeals to be taken in six months became effective June 14, 1911, and, as the petition in error and case-made were not filed within six months from the rendition of the final order complained of, this court is without jurisdiction to consider the cause, and the motion to dismiss is sustained.

State Savings Bank of Manchester, Iowa, v. Bedden et al., 38 Okla. 444 , 134 Pac. 20 ;

Healy v. Davis, 32 Okla. 296, 122 Pac. 157 ;

Gaskin v. Cleveland Woolen Mills, 38 Okla. 229 , 132 Pac. 821 ;

Rolater v. Strain, 31 Okla. 58 , 119 Pac. 992 .

•All the Justices concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1916: 119162026peak 1916 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. St. Louis. S. F. R. Co. v. Taliaferro1916 OK 854, 160 P. 610

Most recent

  1. St. Louis. S. F. R. Co. v. Taliaferro1916 OK 854, 160 P. 610

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

DepthCaseCited by
Healy v. Davis, 1912 OK 184, 122 P. 157 20
Rolater v. Strain, 1911 OK 426, 119 P. 992 18
State Sav. Bank of Manchester, Iowa v. Bedden, 1913 OK 459, 134 P. 20 10
Gaskin v. Mills, 132 P. 821 (Okla. 1913) 4

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list