From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Twine v. Maehl

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Oct 2, 1923
218 P. 1056 (Okla. 1923)

Opinion

No. 11983

Opinion Filed October 2, 1923.

Appeal and Error — Failure to File Brief — Dismissal.

Where the plaintiff in error files no brief as required by Rule 7 of this court, the appeal will be dismissed for want of prosecution.

(Syllabus by Pinkham, C.)

Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 5.

Error from District Court, Muskogee County; Benjamin B. Wheeler, Judge.

Action by Anna Maehl against Mittie A, Twine and Hillard DeGraffenried. Judgment rendered for Anna Maehl. From the judgment Mittie A. Twine and Hillard DeGraffenried bring error. Dismissed for want of prosecution.

Disney, Wheeler Barker, for plaintiffs in error.

B.E. Nussbaum and Earl Bohannon, for defendant in error.


This is an appeal from the action of the district court of Muskogee county, Okla., in rendering judgment in favor of the defendant in error. The cause was duly reached for hearing upon the docket of this court, submitted and assigned for the preparation of an opinion. Upon an examination of the record it appears that neither party has filed a brief in the case, although the time for so doing has long since expired.

In these circumstances the appeal of the plaintiffs in error must be dismissed for want of prosecution.

By the Court: It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Twine v. Maehl

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Oct 2, 1923
218 P. 1056 (Okla. 1923)
Case details for

Twine v. Maehl

Case Details

Full title:TWINE et al. v. MAEHL

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Oct 2, 1923

Citations

218 P. 1056 (Okla. 1923)
94 Okla. 45