From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gilliam v. Juccion

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 9, 1950
218 P.2d 380 (Okla. 1950)

Opinion

No. 34519.

April 25, 1950. Rehearing Denied May 9, 1950.

(Syllabus.)

APPEAL AND ERROR — Review of ruling on demurrer to evidence — Necessity for motion for new trial. The ruling on a demurrer to the evidence is a "decision occurring on the trial," and in order to enable the Supreme Court to review such ruling it is necessary that a motion for new trial be filed within the time prescribed by law.

Appeal from District Court, Tulsa County; Eben L. Taylor, Judge.

Action to cancel a deed by Phillip Juccion and Phillip Juccion, as executor of estate of Mary Juccion, deceased, against Wm. H. Gilliam et al. From judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Dismissed.

Wm. H. Gilliam, of Tulsa, for plaintiffs in error.

Holly L. Anderson and Hughey Baker, both of Tulsa, for defendants in error.


Plaintiffs brought an action to cancel a deed issued by the county commissioners of Tulsa county. The cause was tried to the court upon issues made by the pleadings and at the end of the evidence offered by plaintiffs, defendants demurred to the evidence. The court overruled the demurrer and defendants elected to stand upon the demurrer, whereupon judgment was entered for the plaintiffs canceling the deed. No motion for new trial was filed. Defendants appeal from the order and judgment canceling the deed.

A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that a ruling upon a demurrer to the evidence cannot be reviewed until a motion for new trial has been filed and determined. The motion must be sustained. Ardmore Oil Milling Co. v. Doggett Grain Co., 32 Okla. 280, 122 P. 241; Federal Refining Co. et al. v. Fortuna Oil Co., 77 Okla. 23, 185 P. 1080; Hunt v. Tribune Publishing Co. et al., 172 Okla. 139, 44 P.2d 889.

In Federal Refining Co. et al. v. Fortuna Oil Co., supra, we said:

"Where a party interposes a demurrer to evidence which is overruled, stands upon the demurrer, and judgment is rendered against him, a motion for a new trial must be filed in order for the Supreme Court to review the evidence adduced in the trial court."

Appeal dismissed.


Summaries of

Gilliam v. Juccion

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 9, 1950
218 P.2d 380 (Okla. 1950)
Case details for

Gilliam v. Juccion

Case Details

Full title:GILLIAM et al. v. JUCCION et al

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: May 9, 1950

Citations

218 P.2d 380 (Okla. 1950)
218 P.2d 380

Citing Cases

O'Balliet v. Lillard

Clearly, a review of this specification of error requires a review of the evidence taken at the trial. In…

In re Richardson's Guardianship

This point is well taken. In Gilliam v. Juccion, 203 Okla. 69, 218 P.2d 380, we held: "The ruling on a…