Board of Com'rs of Mayes County v. Vann
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Opinion by RUMMONS, C.
The case-made in this case fails to affirmatively show that the judgment from which plaintiff in error appeals was mitered upon the journal of the court. The case-made contains what appears to bo a decree of the court, to which is attached a stipulation of the attorneys for (he respective parties, agreeing that it is a true, correct, and exact copy of the decree, and that said decree was filed for record on the 10th day of September, 1915. It does not, however, appear where such decree was filed or that it was ever entered upon.the journal of the court. This being the case there is nothing before this court for consideration. Mobley v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co., 44 Okla. 788 , 145 Pac. 321 ; Schuck v. Moore, 48 Okla. 533 , 150 Pac. 461 ; Dodder v. Washita Lumber Co., 51 Okla. 25 , 151 Pac. 679 ; In re. Garland, 52 Okla. 585 , 153 Pac. 153 .
The certificate of the trial judge to the case-made is not attested by the seal of the court. We are therefore without jurisdiction to consider the case-made. Board of Commissioners v. State, 48 Okla. 477 , 150 Pac. 155 ; Tarkenton v. Carpenter, 48 Okla. 498 , 150 Pac. 482 ; Walker v. Walker, 54 Okla. 666 , 154 Pac. 512 . These fatal defects in the record deprive this court of jurisdiction to consider this appeal.
The appeal should therefore be dismissed.
By the Court.: It is so ordered.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.