TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Mounts Oil, Gas & Mineral Co. v. Sandals, Griffin & Co.

MOUNTS OIL, GAS & MINERAL CO. v. SANDALS, GRIFFIN & CO. Et Al.

Mounts Oil v. Sandals, Griffin & Co., 150 P. 1045 (Okla. 1915)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
July 27, 1915
Docket
No. 4877
Judges
Devereux
Citations
150 P. 104550 Okla. 3211915 Okla. LEXIS 429
Disposition
Dismissed.
Syllabus
APPEAL AND ERROK — Petition in Error — Dismissal. A petition in error for the purpose of reviewing an order of the district court dissolving an attachment will be dismissed where it is filed in this court more than 30 days after making such order. (Syllabus by Devereux, C.)
Summary
Error from, District Court, Okmulgee County; ■ Wade S. Stanfield, Judge. Action by the Mounts Oil Gas & Mineral Company against Sandals, Griffin & Co. and others. Attachment dissolved, and plaintiff brings error.

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

Opinion of the Court — Devereux

Opinion by DEVEREUX, C.

This was an appeal from an order dissolving an attachment, which order was> ■entered in the lower court on the 14th day of December, 1912, and 30 days given the plaintiff in error to make •and serve a case-made. The case was not docketed in this ■court until March 18, 1913, more than 90 days after the *322 rendition of the order dissolving the attachment. By section 5266, Rev. Laws 1910, which is a reprint of Statutes of 1893, section 4463, it is provided:

“When an order, discharging or modifying an attachment or temporary injunction shall be made in any case, and the party who obtained such attachment or injunction shall except to such order, for the purpose of having the-same reviewed in the Supreme Court upon the petition in error, the court or judge granting such order shall, upon application of the party, fix the time, not exceeding-thirty days from the discharge or modification of said attachment or injunction, within which such petition in error shall be filed,” etc.

This section has been frequently construed by this court, and it has been uniformly held that, unless the petition in error is docketed in this court within 30 days, this court is without jurisdiction to review such order. See Herring v. Wiggins, 7 Okla. 312, 54 Pac. 483 ;

First National Bank of Hobart v. Spink, 21 Okla. 468 , 97 Pac. 1019 ;

Pioneer Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Incorporated Town of Chelsea, 23 Okla. 720 , 102 Pac. 83 ;

Farmers’ & Merchants’ Bank v. Cox, 40 Okla. 307 , 138 Pac. 148 ;

Harn v. City of Oklahoma City, 43 Okla. 501 , 148 Pac. 1040 .

We therefore recommend that the appeal 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.

1924: 11929: 119242026peak 1924 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Jones v. Nelson1929 OK 463, 281 P. 792
  2. Mitchener v. City Com'rs, City of Okmulgee1924 OK 645, 228 P. 159

Most recent

  1. Jones v. Nelson1929 OK 463, 281 P. 792
  2. Mitchener v. City Com'rs, City of Okmulgee1924 OK 645, 228 P. 159

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 5

DepthCaseCited by
Herring v. Wiggins, 1898 OK 60, 54 P. 483 24
First Nat. Bank of Hobart v. Spink, 1908 OK 128, 97 P. 1019 15
Pioneer Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Inc. Town of Chelsea, 1909 OK 120, 102 P. 83 8
Harn v. Okla. City, 1912 OK 359, 148 P. 1040 5
Farmers' Merchants' State Bank of Eldorado v. Cox, 138 P. 148 (Okla. 1914) 3

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