Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

WRIGHT et al. v. WAGGONER et al.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Appeal and Error — Failure to File Brief — Dismissal.

Where no briefs are filed, as required by rule 7 (47 Okla. vi; 165 Pac. vii) of the Supreme Court, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution.

HIGGINS, J.

This cause was submitted April 20, 1920. In accordance with a stipulation duly filed plaintiffs in error were granted 30 days from that date within which to file their brief. On May 26, thereafter, plaintiffs in error were granted a further extension of 30 days. No briefs having been filed in the cause within the extensions of time granted and no further time having been requested (47 Okla. vi; 165 Pac. vii), the appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. Blanlot v. Carbon Coal Co., 76 Okla. 16, 183 P. 880; Cantwell v. Patterson, 71 Oklahoma, 174 P. 754; Balch v. Pickard, 72 Oklahoma, 179 P. 10.

RAINEY, C. J., and HARRISON, KANE. PITCHFORD, JOHNSON, McNEILL, BAILEY, and COLLIER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WRIGHT v. WAGGONER
(Dec 14, 1920)