From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bender v. Bender

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Nov 18, 1911
119 P. 205 (Okla. 1911)

Opinion

No. 1189

Opinion Filed November 18, 1911.

APPEAL AND ERROR — Dismissal — Failure to File Brief. Where plaintiff in error files 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 Brewer, C.)

Error from District Court, Alfalfa County; M. C. Garber, Judge.

Action by Luella Bender, administratrix of Frank Bender, against William Bender and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error. Dismissed.

Titus, Carpenter Davis, for plaintiff in error.

E. W. Snoddy, for defendants in error


The petition in error and transcript of the record in this case was filed in this court November 4, 1909. The plaintiff in error has failed to file any brief in the cause, as required by rule 7 of this court (20 Okla. viii, 95 Pac. vi). The petition in error should therefore be dismissed, for want of prosecution. Hass et al. v. McCampbell, 27 Okla. 290, 111 P. 543; Maddin v. McCormick et al., 27 Okla. 778, 117 P. 200; McClelland v. Witherall, infra, 119 P. 205; Cox v. Rogers, infra, 119 P. 205.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

All the Justices concur.


Summaries of

Bender v. Bender

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Nov 18, 1911
119 P. 205 (Okla. 1911)
Case details for

Bender v. Bender

Case Details

Full title:BENDER v. BENDER et al

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Nov 18, 1911

Citations

119 P. 205 (Okla. 1911)
119 P. 205

Citing Cases

Snow v. Frye

The appeal should, therefore, be dismissd for want of prosecution under rule 7 (20 Okla. viii, 95 Pac. vi) of…

Schneider v. Fenton

The petition in error should therefore be dismissed for want of prosecution. Bender v. Bender et al., 30…