Case Name: STATE ex rel. UNION STATE BANK OF SHAWNEE et al. v. LINN, District Judge
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1918-11-19
Citations: 71 Okla. 177
Docket Number: No. 9635
Parties: STATE ex rel. UNION STATE BANK OF SHAWNEE et al. v. LINN, District Judge.
Judges: 
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 71
Pages: 177–177

Head Matter:
STATE ex rel. UNION STATE BANK OF SHAWNEE et al. v. LINN, District Judge.
No. 9635
Opinion Filed Nov. 19, 1918.
(176 Pac. 224.)
(Syllabus.)
Courts — Original Action in Supreme Court —Failure to File Briefs — Dismissal.
Where the relators in an original action in this court fail to file briefs in compliance! with' the rules governing same, the cause will be dismissed.
Original mandamus by State of Oklahoma, on relation of the Union State Bank of Shawneej and others, against Conn Linn, Judge of the District Court of Tulsa County, Okla.
Dismissed.
Aby & Tucker and Abernathy & Howell, for relators.
W. N. Redwine and Horace Speed, for respondent.

Opinion:
SHARP, C. J.
On December 11, 1917, re-lators filed in this court their original petition asking that a peremptory Writ of mandamus -issue requiring Hon. Conn Linn, judge of the district court of the Twenty-First judicial district, to certify his disqualification to sit as a trial judge in the case of C. C. Muejller and others, plaintiffs, against the Arkansas River Bed Oil & Gas Company and others, defendants, then pending in the district court of Tulsa county. On the 15th day of December following, motion to strike the] petition was filed. The case- was regularly assigned for submission on April 9. 1918, on which day the relators filejl their motion to dismiss the case at their costs. On the same day and on call of the docket, thd case was submitted. On April 11th thereafter relators were granted leave to withdraw their motion to dismiss. No briefs have ever bden filed, though the cause has been submitted more than seven months.
In such a situation, there! being no effort made to comply with the rules of the court in respect to filing briefs it is manifest that relators have abandoned their cause of action, for which reiason the case is dismissed.