From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mercer v. McKeel

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Sep 29, 1936
61 P.2d 191 (Okla. 1936)

Opinion

No. 27306.

September 29, 1936.

(Syllabus.)

Appeal and Error — Dismissal for Failure to File Petition in Error Within Six-Months Period.

Where the petition in error is not filed in this court until after the expiration of six months from the date of the judgment or order appealed from, the appeal will be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

Appeal from District Court, Pontotoc County; H.H. Edwards, Judge.

Action by J. F. McKeel et al. against J.W. Mercer for possession of real property. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Dismissed.

C.F. Green, for plaintiff in error.

W.W. Pryor and J.F. McKeel, for defendants in error.


After judgment was rendered for the plaintiffs in the above-entitled action, an order of the court overruling motion for new trial was entered the 30th day of December, 1935. The appeal was lodged in this court on the 9th day of July, 1936. A motion to dismiss has been filed and response thereto admits that the case was not filed within the six months as provided by law.

This court has many times held that where the appeal is not taken within six months of the date of the judgment or order sought to be reversed, the court is without jurisdiction. Showalter v. Hampton, 122 Okla. 192, 253 P. 105; Board of County Com'rs, Kiowa County, v. Kiowa National Bank, 166 Okla. 255, 27 P.2d 338; Williams v. Local Bldg. Loan Ass'n, 165 Okla. 244, 25 P.2d 1086; Starr v. Woods, 162 Okla. 242, 19 P.2d 561.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

McNEILL, C. J., OSBORN, V. C. J., and BAYLESS, CORN, and GIBSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mercer v. McKeel

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Sep 29, 1936
61 P.2d 191 (Okla. 1936)
Case details for

Mercer v. McKeel

Case Details

Full title:MERCER v. McKEEL et al

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Sep 29, 1936

Citations

61 P.2d 191 (Okla. 1936)
61 P.2d 191

Citing Cases

Mercer v. McKeel

Mercer attempted to appeal to this court, and the appeal was dismissed for the reason that it was not…