Case ID: okla_31/html/0285-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "DUNN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

MURPHY v. TAYLOR.
    
      No. 3065.
    Opinion Filed January 9, 1912.
    (121 Pac. 1077.)
    APPEAL AND ERROR — Preparation of Case-Made — Extension of Time. Neither the court nor the judge thereof in vacation after the time granted in which to prepare and serve a case-made has expired has the power to extend the time previously granted by the court in which to make and serve a ease-made.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    
      Error from Superior Court, Muskogee County; Farrar L. McCain, Judge.
    
    Action by Zack Murphy against L. C. Taylor. From the judgment, Záck Murphy brings error.
    Dismissed.
    
      A. S. McRea, for plaintiff in error.
    
      Brown & Stewart, for defendant in error.
   DUNN, J.

This case presents error from the superior court of Muskogee county, and was filed in this court on September 20, 1911. November 28, 1911, counsel for defendant in error filed a motion to strike the case-made and dismiss the appeal for the reason that the case-made was not served within the time fixed and allowed by the court, nor, as it developed, within a time lawfully extended within the time granted. The assignments of error which are made are those only which could be raised upon the denial .of a motion for a new trial, to present which it is necessary that'a case-made'or bill of exceptions duly prepared be submitted to support. The motion for new trial in this case was denied on March 25, 1911, at which time the court granted an extension of 60 days within which to prepare and serve a' case-made. The case-made which is before us appears not to have been served within the time so extended, nor was any order extending the time made within such time, and, according to a uniform course of decisions of this court, the motion must be sustained. See Soliss v. Davis, 28 Okla. 496, 114 Pac. 609; London & Lancashire Lire Ins. Co. v. Cummings et al., 23 Okla. 126, 99 Pac. 654, and authorities therein cited.

All the Justices concur.