Case ID: okla_60/html/0204-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "BRUNSON, O.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WILCOX v. WOOTTON.
    No. 7345.
    Opinion Filed September 12, 1916.
    (159 Pac. 1118.)
    1. Appeal and Error — Briefs—Dismissal.
    Where plaintiff in error fails to file briefs in the Supreme Court in compliance with the rules and orders of the court, his appeal will be dismissed.
    2. Appeal and Error — Supersedeas Bond— Sureties.
    In a case appealed to the Supreme Court, where supersedeas bond has been given and approved staying execution and the judgment here is against the appellant, this court, by virtue of the provisions of chapter 249, Sess. Laws 1915, will enter judgment against the sureties on such supersedeas bond.
    (Syllabus by Brunson, C.)
    Error from County Court, Greer County; R. M. Thacker, Judge.
    Action by V. R. Wootton against T. S. Wilcox. There was a judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. On mo.tion •to dismiss and for judgment against the sureties on supersedeas bond.
    Motion sustained.
    Percy Powers and E. M. Stewart, for plaintiff in error.
    S. D. Williams and Wylie Snow, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

BRUNSON, O.

On the 9th day of November, A. D. 1914, a trial was had in this case in the court below, which resulted in a verdict and judgment against the plaintiff in error in the sum of $183.55. A motion for a new trial was filed and overruled, and the case is here on appeal from said judgment.

A motion is filed in this court by the defendant in error, asking that the appeal be dismissed because no brief has been filed by the plaintiff in error. No brief has been filed by the plaintiff in error in compliance with the rules of this court, and no excuse is offered .why the same has not been done, and for that reason the motion is sustained, and the appeal is dismissed. In said motion it is also asked that, in the event the appeal is dismissed by this court, judgment be rendered against the sureties on the supersedeas bond filed and approved in the trial court, staying execution on the judgment so entered in said cause. On appeal to this court from said judgment a supersedeas bond -was filed and approved in the trial court, the same being executed by the plaintiff in error as principal, and Loyd Cox, M. A. Johnson, W. A. Fitzgerald, L. W. Lee, and J. F. McMillan as sureties, to stay said judgment. By virtue-of the'provisions of chapter 249 of the Session Laws of 1915, as construed in the case of Long v. Lang, 49 Okla. 342, 152 Pac. 1078, and Butts v. Rothschild Bros. Hat Co., 60 Okla. —, 159 Pac. 245, the motion for judgment against the said sureties on the super-sedeas bond is sustained.

Judgment is therefore entered in this court against Loyd Cox, M. A. Johnson. W. A. Fitzgerald. L. W. Lee, and J. F. McMillan in the sum of $183.55, together with interest thereon at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from and after the 9th day of November, A. D. 1914, and all costs of this action.

By the Court: It is so ordered.