Case Name: In re ESTATE OF BETSEY. SARNEY et al. v. KINCH et al.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1923-06-12
Citations: 90 Okla. 82
Docket Number: No. 11489
Parties: In re ESTATE OF BETSEY. SARNEY et al. v. KINCH et al.
Judges: NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, HARRISON, and MASON. JJ.. concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 90
Pages: 82–82

Head Matter:
In re ESTATE OF BETSEY. SARNEY et al. v. KINCH et al.
No. 11489
Opinion Filed June 12, 1923.
(■Syllabus.)
Appeal and Error — Failure' to Pile Brief— Dismissal.
Where an order dismissing an appeal for want of prosecution is vacated, and time granted plaintiffs in error in which to file briefs, and briefs are not filed in the time allowed, the appeal will be dismissed.
Error from District Court, Muskogee County; Benjamin B. Wheeler, Judge.
In the matter of the estate of Betsey, deceased ; action by Bailie Sarney and others against Joseph Ranch and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error.
Appeal dismissed.
Davis & Kyle, for plaintiffs in error.
Geo- L. Burke, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
MCNEILL, J.
Plaintiffs in error, plaintiffs below, commenced tbis action in the district court of Muskogee county against the defendants in error, defendants below, by the filing of a transcript on appeal from (he county court of said county. The district court rendered judgment in favor, of defendants, from which plaintiffs appealed. On April 24, 1923, the appeal wias dismissed by tbis court for want of prosecution. Thereafter plaintiffs in error filed a motion to vacate the order of dismissal and for time in which to file briefs. On May S, 1923-, the order dismissing the appeal was vacated and ten days given from that date in which to file briefs. No briefs were filed in tbe time allowed and no reason given for failuve so to do. The appeal is therefore dismissed.
NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, HARRISON, and MASON. JJ.. concur.