From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Whitaker v. Chestnut

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 8, 1917
165 P. 160 (Okla. 1917)

Opinion

No. 7640

Opinion Filed May 8, 1917.

Appeal and Error — Petition in Error — Order of Court — Review.

"Order of the court on a motion to vacate a judgment is not a part of the record proper and cannot be reviewed by this court on petition in error and transcript."

(Syllabus by Stewart, C.)

Error from District Court, Mayes County; Preston S. Davis, Judge.

Action by W.J. Whitaker against H.M. Chestnut. Judgment by default, defendant's motion on his special appearance to vacate and set aside the judgment sustained, and plaintiff files petition in error and transcript. Appeal dismissed.

J. Howard Langley, for plaintiff in error.

T.C. Wilson and Irwin Donovan, for defendant in error.


The plaintiff, W.J. Whitaker, obtained a judgment against the defendant, H.M. Chestnut, in the district court of Mayes county by default. Afterwards, by special appearance, the defendant moved the court to vacate and set aside the judgment, which motion was by the court sustained. The plaintiff attempts to appeal to this court by petition in error and transcript.

In Orr v. Fulton, 52 Okla. 621, 153 P. 149, it is said:

"A motion to vacate a judgment copied into a transcript constitutes no part of the record, and presents no question for review by the Supreme Court on appeal."

In Menten v. Shuttee, 11 Okla. 381, 67 P. 478, the Supreme Court of the territory of Oklahoma says:

"Motions presented to the trial court, the rulings thereon, and exceptions, are not properly part of the record, and can only be preserved and presented for review on appeal by incorporating the same into a bill of exceptions or case-made."

Such is the uniform holding of this court, as shown by the following authorities: Tribal Developing Company v. White Bros., 28 Okla. 525, 114 P. 736; McCoy v. McCoy, 27 Okla. 372, 112 P. 1040; Veverka v. Frank et al., 41 Okla. 142, 137 P. 682; Grady County v. Schrock et al., 53 Okla. 144, 155 P. 882.

We have no discretion.

Following the authorities cited, the appeal is dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Whitaker v. Chestnut

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
May 8, 1917
165 P. 160 (Okla. 1917)
Case details for

Whitaker v. Chestnut

Case Details

Full title:WHITAKER v. CHESTNUT

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: May 8, 1917

Citations

165 P. 160 (Okla. 1917)
165 P. 160

Citing Cases

Williams v. Kelly

But this transcript contains no such motion or the action of the court in overruling same. Nor does it…

Savery v. Cochran

The appeal is therefore by transcript. This court has many times held that motion and the rulings made…