TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Polson v. Purcell and Jackson

T. M. Polson v. C. C. Purcell and W. M. Jackson

Polson v. Purcell & Jackson, 46 P. 578 (Okla. 1896)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 13, 1896
Judges
Bieber, Dale
Citations
46 P. 5784 Okla. 93
Headnotes
Case Made — Extension of Time to Make, Void. The district court, or the-judge thereof, has no power to extend the time for serving a case made after the extension of time originally granted has expired. {Abel v. Blair, 3 Oklahoma 392, 41 Pacific, 342 followed).
Summary
Error From, the District Court of Payne County.

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

Opinion of the Court — BiebeR

The opinion of the court was delivered by BiebeR, J.:

The defendants in error have presented their motion to dismiss the appeal brought in this case to this court, the ground of their motion being that the-case made was not served in time.

The record shows that the judgment of the district court was rendered on the 24th day of November, 1893,. and the plaintiff in error given sixty days to make and serve case made.

It further shows that on February 1, 1894, the plaintiff in error, by his attorney, made a motion to be granted a further extension of time of thirty days to make and serve his case made, and to this motion is attached the affidavit of his attorney that he has been unable to prepare his appeal and serve case made in the-cause.

The record shows an acceptance of service of case made by the attorneys for the defendants in error, but does not show when it was served. The record should always affirmatively show that the case made was served in time. This record not only does not do this, but it does show, by the affidavit of. appellant’s own attorney,.

*94 that it was not served in time, and that was his reason for getting a further extension of time. The extension of time was granted by the trial judge as asked for, but he had no power to then extend the time to make a case made, and the extension was absolutely void.

(Abel v. Blair, 3 Oklahoma, 399, 41 Pacific, 342 ).

The appeal is dismissed.

Dale, O. J., who presided in the case below, not sitting; all the other Justices concurring.

How later courts describe this case

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

Cited by 11 cases

View all citing references →
1898: 11899: 11907: 21909: 21910: 31911: 11925: 118982026peak 1910 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Board of County Commissioners of Garfield v. Porter1907 OK 98, 92 P. 152
  2. Rasberry v. State1909 OK CR 175, 103 P. 865
  3. Bradford v. State1910 OK CR 9, 106 P. 535
  4. Board of Comrs. Day Co. v. Hubble1899 OK 7, 57 P. 163
  5. Hawkins v. State1911 OK CR 76, 114 P. 356
  6. Okmulgee Securities Co. v. Osage Oil & Refining Co.1925 OK 486, 237 P. 105

Most recent

  1. Okmulgee Securities Co. v. Osage Oil & Refining Co.1925 OK 486, 237 P. 105
  2. Hawkins v. State1911 OK CR 76, 114 P. 356
  3. Cohn v. State1910 OK CR 238, 113 P. 216
  4. Cohn v. State1910 OK CR 237, 113 P. 217
  5. Bradford v. State1910 OK CR 9, 106 P. 535
  6. Bray v. Bray105 P. 200 (Okla. 1909)

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 1

DepthCaseCited by
Abel v. Blair, 41 P. 342 (Okla. 1895) 23

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