From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Overstreet

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Apr 15, 1913
132 P. 480 (Okla. 1913)

Opinion

No. 2629

Opinion Filed April 15, 1913. Rehearing Denied May 20, 1913.

APPEAL AND ERROR — Brief — Dismissal. Where plaintiff in error fails to comply with rule 25 (20 Okla. xii, 95 Pac. viii) of this court, in that its brief contains no specifications of errors, the cause may be dismissed.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from County Court, Creek County; Josiah G. Davis, Judge.

Action by John W. Overstreet against the United States Fidelity Guaranty Company and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and the defendant named brings error. Dismissed.

J. L. De Groat, for plaintiff in error.

Henry McGraw, for defendant in error.


On August 25, 1910, in the county court of Creek county, J. W. Overstreet, defendant in error, sued plaintiffs in error, Rothchild Co. and the United States Fidelity Guaranty Co., foreign corporations, as principal and surety, respectively, on a replevin bond executed by them in a suit against the plaintiff for the recovery of a piano, alleging as breach thereof that said Rothchild Co., as plaintiff therein, had failed to recover and refused to redeliver the property on demand. After defendants had each appeared specially, and their motions to quash the service of the summons had been sustained, alias summons was served on the United States Fidelity Guaranty Co., and, failing to answer, judgment was rendered and entered against it by default for $408 and costs. On December 17, 1910, a day in the same term, came said defendant and moved the court to vacate and set aside said judgment on certain alleged grounds, which the court overruled, and defendant brings the case here.

The grounds set forth in the motion, ten in number, are purely technical; and, in that the same was not presented to the trial court accompanied with an answer setting forth a valid defense to the action, which seems to be required by Comp. Laws 1909, sec. 6089 (Rev. Laws 1910, sec. 5262 [ Schuyler v. Fowler, 63 Kan. 98, 64 P. 1035; Lookabaugh v. Epperson, 28 Okla. 472, 114 P. 738]), it fails to address itself to us with much force. Indeed, since defendant has failed to comply with our rule 25 (20 Okla. xii, 95 Pac. viii), in that its brief contains no specifications of the errors complained of, we will consider none of them, but will dismiss the case. It is so ordered.

All the Justices concur.


Summaries of

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Overstreet

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Apr 15, 1913
132 P. 480 (Okla. 1913)
Case details for

United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Overstreet

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES FIDELITY GUARANTY CO. v. OVERSTREET

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Apr 15, 1913

Citations

132 P. 480 (Okla. 1913)
132 P. 480

Citing Cases

Federal Discount Co. v. Gault Bros

Inasmuch as the point or points relied upon for reversal of the judgment are not specified and supported by…

Curran Treadaway v. American Bonding Co.

It is to be observed that while every act of embezzlement involves a shortage, every shortage does not…