Case Name: SMYSER & McCORMICK v. HUDSON
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1913-03-11
Citations: 38 Okla. 104
Docket Number: No. 3244
Parties: SMYSER & McCORMICK v. HUDSON.
Judges: HAYES, C. J., and KANE and TURNER, JJ., concur; WILLIAMS, J. absent.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 38
Pages: 104–105

Head Matter:
SMYSER & McCORMICK v. HUDSON.
No. 3244.
Opinion Filed March 11, 1913.
Rehearing Denied May 6, 1913.
(131 Pac. 1076.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Necessary Parties — Dismissal. A petition in error by one of several defendants against whom judgment was entered jointly for the recovery of a specified sum, to which the other defendants are neither made parties plaintiff nor defendant in error, must be dismissed for want of necessary parties.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from. District Coivrt, Pawnee County; L. M. Poe, Judge.
Action -by Frank Hudson against Smyser & McCormick and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and front an order denying motion of defendants named for new trial they alone bring error.
Dismissed.
Henry S. Johnston, for plaintiffs in error.
W. L. Eagleton, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
DUNN, J.
This ease presents error from the district court of Pawnee county. November 1, 1910, the said court rendered a joint judgment against the Arkansas Yalley Town-site Company and H. C. Hanna, who were held liable upon .a certain promissory note. From an order of the court denying a motion for new trial of Smyser & McCormick, appeal has been lodged in this court.
The defendant in error now moves to dismiss the cause upon the ground of nonjoinder of proper parties. The record shows that the motion which was denied was filed on behalf of Smyser & McCormick, and time to make .and serve case was granted to them alone, and the case-made was served upon the defendant in error, Frank Hudson, only, and that the time and place of settling and signing the case-made was not served upon nor waived by any of the other defendants. Hence it follows from the uniform holding .of this court in a large number of cases that the motion to dismiss must be sustained. Bullen v. Hudson et al., 31 Okla. 818, 124 Pac. 1; Seton v. Hudson, 31 Okla. 820, 124 Pac. 1.
The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
HAYES, C. J., and KANE and TURNER, JJ., concur; WILLIAMS, J. absent.