From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

HAZELWOOD v. ROBE

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Sep 14, 1920
79 Okla. 214 (Okla. 1920)

Opinion

No. 11418

Opinion Filed September 14, 1920.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Appeal and Error — Assignment of Errors — Overruling Motion for New Trial — Dismissal.

Appeal dismissed for reason stated in the opinion.

Error from District Court, Okfuskee County; Lucien B. Wright, Judge.

Action between Tom Hazelwood and others and John M. Robe. From the judgment, the former bring error. Dismissed.

Tom Hazelwood, for plaintiffs in error.

J. Hugh Nolen and Huddleston, Hackensmith, Stephenson White, for defendant in error.


The defendant in error has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal herein taken. There is no response filed.

In the petition in error it is not assigned as error that the trial court erred in overruling the motion for new trial.

The plaintiffs in error complain of error on the part of the trial court occurring during the progress of the trial.

In Nichols v. Dexter, 52 Okla. 152, 152 P. 817, it is stated:

"Where the overruling of the motion for a new trial is not assigned as error in the petition in error, errors alleged to have occurred during the trial are not properly presented, and cannot be reviewed."

The appeal is dismissed.

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


Summaries of

HAZELWOOD v. ROBE

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Sep 14, 1920
79 Okla. 214 (Okla. 1920)
Case details for

HAZELWOOD v. ROBE

Case Details

Full title:HAZELWOOD et al. v. ROBE

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Sep 14, 1920

Citations

79 Okla. 214 (Okla. 1920)
192 P. 566

Citing Cases

Randolph v. Cantrell

The record on appeal should accordingly show that the appellant or plaintiff in error was a party or…