Case Name: CASWELL et al. v. EATON, Adm'r
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1914-11-10
Citations: 43 Okla. 718
Docket Number: No. 6642
Parties: CASWELL et al. v. EATON, Adm’r.
Judges: All the Justices concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 43
Pages: 718–719

Head Matter:
CASWELL et al. v. EATON, Adm’r.
No. 6642.
Opinion Filed November 10, 1914.
(144 Pac. 591.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Petition in Error — Time of Filing. When petition in error is not filed in this court for more than six months after the date of the final order sought to be reviewed, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from Superior Court, Muskogee County; Parrar E. McCain, Judge.
Action by W. N. Eaton against J. B. Caswell and R. W. Talbot. On the death of plaintiff, the action was revived in the name of Ernest Eaton, administrator. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
Dismissed.
Blakeney & Maxey, for plaintiffs in error.
Brook & Brook, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
BLEAKMORE, J.
This case presents error from the superior court of Muskogee county, and now comes on to be heard upon motion of defendant in error to dismiss the appeal. Motion for new trial was overruled on October 11, 1913. Petition in error and case-made were lodged in this court'on the 20th day of July, 1914, more than six months after the date of the final order sought to be reviewed.
The record discloses that the original plaintiff, one W. N. Eaton, departed this life on the 15th day of March, 1914, and that the case was revived in the trial court bn the 23d day of June, 1914, in the name of Ernest Eaton, administrator, who is made defendant in error in this proceeding. There is nothing in the statutory provisions authorizing the revivor of an action which extends the time within which a proceeding in error must be filed in this court.
The statutory period for perfecting an appeal having expired, this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the same. Malloy v. Johnson et al., 40 Okla. 454, 139 Pac. 310, and cases there cited.
This proceeding is therefore dismissed.
All the Justices concur.