Case ID: okla_40/html/0454-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LOOFBOURROW, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MALLOY v. JOHNSON et al.
    
    No. 5990.
    Opinion Filed March 3, 1914.
    (139 Pac. 310.)
    1. APPEAL AND ERROR — Time for Taking Appeal. Where more than six months has intervened between the rendition of the final order sought to be reviewed and the filing of the petition in error in the Supreme Court, this court has no jurisdiction to review such final order.
    2. STATUTES — Time for Taking Appeal — Repeal by Revision. Section 5255, Rev. Laws 1910, does not repeal chapter 18, Sess. Laws 1910-11.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
      Error from District Court, Okfuskee County;
    
    
      John Caruthers, Judge.
    
    Action between David P. Malloy and Dock Johnson and others. From the judgment, Malloy brings error.
    Dismissed.
    /. A. Baker, for plaintiff in error.
    
      C. T. Huddleston, for defendants in error.
   LOOFBOURROW, J.

In this case motion for new trial was overruled by the court below on May 31, 1913; the petition in error and case-made were filed in this court on January 13, 1914, so that more than six months had expired between the date of the final order sought to be reviewed and the filing of the petition in error. It has been repeatedly held that after the expiration of the time allowed -by law for perfecting the appeal, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the same. See Tishomingo Elec. Co. v. Harris, 28 Okla. 10, 113 Pac. 713; Fairbanks-Morse & Co. v. Thurmond et al., 31 Okla. 612, 122 Pac. 167; Healy v. Davis, 32 Okla. 296, 122 Pac. 157; State Savings Bank, etc., v. Bedden et al., 38 Okla. 444, 134 Pac. 20.

The plaintiff in error contends that section 5255, Rev. Laws 1910, which provides that appeals must be brought within one year, controls in this case. It is true that the Revised Laws took effect on the 16th day of May, 1913, as contended by plaintiff in error, but section 2 of the adopting act expressly provides that the adoption of the Revised Laws of 1910 shall not be construed to repeal any act of the Legislature enacted subsequent to the adjournment of the extraordinary session of the Legislature which convened in January, 1910. Sess. Laws 1910-11, c. 18, places the six months’ limitation, by which we must be governed.

The appeal is therefore dismissed.

All the Justices concur.