Case Name: MANNING v. STROUD STATE BANK
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1910-07-12
Citations: 26 Okla. 625
Docket Number: No. 519
Parties: MANNING v. STROUD STATE BANK.
Judges: All the Justices concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 625–625

Head Matter:
MANNING v. STROUD STATE BANK.
No. 519.
Opinion Filed July 12, 1910.
(110 Pac. 650.)
PLEADING — Unauthorized Verification — Judgment on Pleadings. An unverified answer embodying a plea..of non est factum having been filed and on the day the case was .set for tria-1, but before ■ -it was called for .trial, the defendant, without having first obtained leave of the court, having-verified the answer before the clerk of the court, the plaintiff; without moving to -strike the answer from the file moved for judgment on the pleadings, which was granted by the court. Held, that this was error.
(Syllabus by the. Court.)
Error from District Court,"Lincoln County; W. N. Maben, Judge_
Action by the Stroud State Bank against P. C. Manning. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error.
Eeversed.
M. D. Owen, G. A. Neeley, and-W. Jones, for plaintiff in error.
Hoffman & Robertson and Charles B. Wilson, Jr., for defendant in error.

Opinion:
WILLIAMS, J.
Did the court err in rendering judgment upon the pleadings, it appearing that the answer at the time it was filed, unverified, denied the execution of the note sued on, but was sworn to by the defendant before the clerk of the court on the-day the case was called for trial, without first having obtained leave of court thereto? No motion was made to strike the answer from the files on account of such improper verification. As long as the answer remained on file verified, though without .permission of the court, it was error to render judgment for the' plaintiff against the defendant on the pleadings. 22 Ency. Pl. & Pr. p. 1048.
.The judgment of the lower court is reversed and remanded, with instructions to grant a new trial.
All the Justices concur.