From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Frazier v. Nichols

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Jun 1, 1915
149 P. 1181 (Okla. 1915)

Opinion

No. 4615

Opinion Filed June 1, 1915.

APPEAL AND ERROR — Grounds for Dismissal — Summons in Error — Return. It is the service of the summons in error, and not the return, that gives this court jurisdiction, and where summons in error was issued December 4, 1912, and regularly served December 12, 1912, a motion to dismiss will be denied, although the summons was not returned until May 3, 1915.

(Syllabus by Brett, C.)

Error from District Court, McClain County; R. McMillan, Judge.

Action by Sam Frazier and others against W. H. Nichols and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error, and defendants move to dismiss the petition in error. Motion overruled.

E. O. Clark and Robt. E. Lee, for plaintiffs in error.

Rennie, Hocker Moore, for defendants in error.


This case was tried before R. McMillan, district judge of McClain county, and resulted in a judgment in favor of the defendants in error, who were defendants in the lower court. The plaintiffs in error bring the case to this court by petition in error and transcript.

The case was docketed in this court on December 4, 1912, and on that date summons in error was issued, but was not returned and filed in this court until May 3, 1915. However, the return of the officer shows that each of the defendants in error was duly served December 12, 1912. While the long delay in making the return is evidence of inexcusable negligence, yet the return shows the service to have been regular, which gives this court jurisdiction of the cause.

We recommend that the motion to dismiss be overruled.

By the Court: It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Frazier v. Nichols

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Jun 1, 1915
149 P. 1181 (Okla. 1915)
Case details for

Frazier v. Nichols

Case Details

Full title:FRAZIER et al. v. NICHOLS et al

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Jun 1, 1915

Citations

149 P. 1181 (Okla. 1915)
149 P. 1181

Citing Cases

Selected Investments Corporation v. Bell

It is the service of summons and not the return thereof which confers jurisdiction upon the court to render…

Hamilton v. International Bank of Haskell

Even if the statute required notice upon someone other than the treasurer, the state's motion to dismiss…