Case Name: NEAL v. LYLE
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1923-10-23
Citations: 96 Okla. 135
Docket Number: No. 14479
Parties: NEAL v. LYLE.
Judges: JOHNSON, C. J., and KANE, KENNAMER, NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, BRANSON, and MASON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 96
Pages: 135–135

Head Matter:
NEAL v. LYLE.
No. 14479
Opinion Filed Oct. 23, 1923.
Rehearing Denied Nov. 20, 1923.
(Syllabus.)
Municipal Corporations — Town Officers— Time for Qualification and 'Assuming Date** — Delay.
The failure, of any person elected to an office, to qualify and enter upon the duties of such office within the time prescribed by section 4759, Comp. Stat. 1921, by taking the oath prescribed by section 126, Id., and filing the necessary bond, is cured by section 127, Id., if the person so elected or appointed has been prevented from qualifying and entering Upon his duties within the time prescribed by said section 4759, and such person will be allowed the time provided in said section 127, in which to qualify and enter upon his dutea.
Error from 'District Court, Pottawatomie County; Hal Johnson, Judge.
Action by Adolph Lyle against John A. Neal. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
Affirmed.
R. H. Reily and A. M. Baldwin, for plaintiff in error
Arrington & Evans, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
HARRISON, J.
By agreement of parties the decision in this case may follow the decision in No. 14478, Schoemann v. Southgate, 96 Okla. 106, 220 Pac. 461. The facts in the two cases being substantially the same and the law governing the state of facts in each case being identical, except that in the case at bar the defendant in error was elected to the office of city clerk of the town of Wanette at the same election in which defendant in error in Schoemann v. Southgate, supra, was elected city treasurer.
A separate judgment in the instant case was rendfered in favor of Lyle, and peremptory writ issued to plaintiff' in error, Neal, to turn over to Lyle the office of city clerk and the things belonging thereto.
Following the reasoning and the law announced in Schoemann v. Southgate, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
JOHNSON, C. J., and KANE, KENNAMER, NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, BRANSON, and MASON, JJ., concur.