SNOW ET AL. v. FRYE ET AL

APPEAL AND ERROR — Failure to File Briefs — Dismissal. Where plaintiff in error has filed no brief, as required by rule 7 of this court (20 Okla. viii, 95 Pac. vi), the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Syllabus by Robertson, C.)

Opinion by ROBERTSON, C.

This appeal was filed January 3, 1911. Plaintiffs in error have filed no brief, nor has any excuse been offered for their failure to do so. It is evident that the proceedings have been abandoned. The appeal should, therefore, be dismissd for want of prosecution under rule 7 (20 Okla. viii, 95 Pac. vi) of this court. Hass v. McCampbell, 27 Okla. 290, 111 P. 543; Maddin v. McCormick, 27 Okla. 779, 117 P. 200; Bender v. Bender et al., 30 Okla. 288, 119 P. 205; Cox v. Rogers, 30 Okla. 296, 119 P. 205; McClelland v. Witherall, 30 Okla. 287, 119 P. 205.

By the Court: It is so ordered.