Case ID: okla_25/html/0426-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Williams, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Chouteau et al. v. Chouteau.
    No. 872.
    Opinion Filed January 11, 1910.
    (106 Pac. 854.)
    APPEAL AND ERROR — Time of Taking Appeal — Ind. Ter. Procedure. Six months was the time within which a writ of error or appeal could -be taken subsequent to March 3. 1905, to review a judgment of the United -States Court of the Indian Territory in •t-he Court of Appeals of said territory.
    (Syllabus 'by the Court.)
    
      Error from the United States Court for the Northern District of the Indian Territoryj Joseph A. Gill, Judge.
    
    Action between John Chouteau and others and Addie Chou-teau. From the judgment, John Chouteau and others bring error.
    Dismissed.
    
      George E. McCulloch, for plaintiffs in error.
    
      D. II. Wilson, for defendant in error.
   Williams, J.

The order from which the writ of error was sued out was made and entered on the 9th day of May, 1906, and the writ allowed on the 30th day of April, A. D. 1907.

The defendant in error moves to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the same was not prosecuted within six months from the time of the rendition of the judgment and the entering of the order sought to be appealed from. This question has been not only by this court, but also by the United States Court of Appeals for the Indian Territory, and of the Eighth Circuit, decided favorably to the contention of the defendant in error. Porter et al. v. Brook, 21 Okla. 885, 97 Pac. 645 ; Moberly v. Roth et al., 23 Okla. 856, 102 Pac. 182; Friend et al. v. Roth et al., 23 Okla. 864, 102 Pac. 185 ; Friend et al. v. Roth et al., 23 Okla. 866, 102 Pac. 186; Bickford v. Bruce et al., 21 Okla. 892, 97 Pac. 648; Utterback v. Rock Island Plow Co., 22 Okla. 263, 97 Pac. 649; In re Terrell’s Estate, 6 Ind. T. 412, 98 S. W. 143; Lewis et al. v. Sittel, 7 Ind. T. 602, 104 S. W. 850; Id., 165 Fed. 157, 91 C. C. A. 191.

The appeal is dismissed.

Kane, C. J., and Dunn and Hayes, JJ., concur; Turner, J., not participating.