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

LIDECKER TOOL CO. v. COGHILL, Constable

APPEAL AND ERROR — Case-Made — Extension of Time — Special Judge — Judge Pro Tem. A special judge, or a judge pro tempore, has no power, after he ceases to sit as a judge, to extend the time for making and serving a case-made; and, where he attempts to do so, his act is a nullity.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

WILLIAMS, J.

On January 11, 1911, the motion for a new trial was overruled by John Q. Adams, the judge pro tempore, who tried the cause in the lower court. At that time the plaintiff in error (plaintiff below) was granted an extension of 60 days in which to prepare and serve a case-made. On March 3, 1911, the said John Q. Adams, as judge pro tempore, again extended the time for 60 days in which to prepare and serve a case-made. The case-made was served on May 8, 1911, and settled by the said John Q. Adams, the special judge, on May 22, 1911.

It is settled that a special judge, or judge pro tempore, after he has ceased to sit as a judge, has no power to extend the time to serve a case-made, and "where he attempts to do so his act is a nullity." Murphey v. Favors, 31 Okla. 162, 120 P. 641; Casner v. Wooley, 28 Okla. 424, 114 P. 700; Horner v. Goltry Sons, 23 Okla. 905, 101 P. 1111; City of Shawnee v. Farrell, 22 Okla. 652, 98 P. 942.

The proceeding in error is therefore dismissed.

All the Justices concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LIDECKER TOOL CO. v. COGHILL, CONSTABLE
(Dec 3, 1912)