Title: PHILLIPS v. HACKLER
Citation: 153 P. 86 3, 1915 OK 1087, 49 Okla. 586
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: December 21, 1915

PHILLIPS v. HACKLER Annotate this Case PHILLIPS v. HACKLER 1915 OK 1087 153 P. 863 49 Okla. 586 Case Number: 6580 Decided: 12/21/1915 Supreme Court of Oklahoma PHILLIPS et al. v. HACKLER. Syllabus ¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Appeal From Joint Judgment--Necessary Parties--Service of Case-Made. All parties to a joint judgment must be joined in a proceeding in error in this court, either as plaintiffs in error or as defendants in error, before such judgments can be reviewed; and where a review of the judgment is sought by means of a petition in error and case-made, service of the case-made within the time prescribed by the statutes must be had against all parties who do not join in the appeal as plaintiffs in error, but who are made parties thereto as defendants in error. Error from District Court, Bryan County; Jesse M. Hatchett. Judge. Action by Mary Hackler against Charles A. Phillips and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Dismissed. Victor C. Phillips, for plaintiffs in Hatchett & Ferguson, for defendant in error KANE, C. J. ¶1 This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to dismiss, filed by the defendant in error upon the following ground: "The judgment rendered herein is a joint judgment in favor of Mary Hackler against three defendants, Sam Dane, Chas. A. Phillips, and Victor C. Phillips. The defendants Chas. A. Phillips and Victor C. Phillips filed motion for new trial, which was overruled and time given in which to serve case-made. No case-made was ever served on the defendant Sam Dane. There is no showing of service on Sam Dane and no waiver by him. This renders the case-made void; and, since this is an appeal by case-made, there is nothing for the court to consider, and hence the same should be dismissed." ¶2 This contention seems to be well taken. It is supported by National Surety Co. v. Oklahoma Presbyterian College, 38 Okla. 429 , 132 P. 652, cited by the movants, and by many other cases. ¶3 The motion to dismiss is sustained. ¶4 All the Justices concur.