Title: SAXON v. HARDIN
Citation: 118 P. 26 4, 118 P. 264, 1911 OK 186, 29 Okla. 17
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: May 9, 1911

SAXON v. HARDIN Annotate this Case SAXON v. HARDIN 1911 OK 186 118 P. 264 29 Okla. 17 Case Number: 781 Decided: 05/09/1911 Supreme Court of Oklahoma SAXON v. HARDIN. Syllabus ¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Case-Made--Time for Service--Dismissal. Where a case-made was not served until after the extension of time made by a valid order of the court has expired, it is void; and where the proceeding in error presents no error that can be reviewed upon a transcript of the record, the proceeding will be dismissed. Error from District Court, Pottawatomie County; W. N. Maben, Judge. Action by C. Hardin against J. W. Saxon. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error. Dismissed. T. G. Cutlip, for plaintiff in error. A. M. Baldwin, for defendant in error. HAYES, J. ¶1 Defendant in error brought this action in the court below to recover the amount of $ 325, for services alleged to have been rendered under a contract with plaintiff in error. The assignments of error relied upon in plaintiff in error's brief for reversal of the cause complain only of alleged errors occurring at the trial. Motion for a new trial was overruled on the 21st day of April, 1908, at which time plaintiff in error was allowed thirty days in which to make and serve a case-made; and plaintiff was allowed ten days thereafter to suggest amendments. The record discloses that the case-made was not served until the 20th day of June, 1908, which was subsequent to the extension of time granted for serving same; and upon authority of the following cases the case-made must be held a nullity: Lathim v. Schlack, 27 Okla. 522, 112 P. 968; Bettis v. Cargile et al., 23 Okla. 301 , 100 P. 436; Willson v. Willson, 27 Okla. 419 , 112 P. 970; Carr v. Thompson, 27 Okla. 7 , 110 P. 667. ¶2 The record is also certified to by the clerk of the court as a transcript; but, since none of the errors assigned are such as may be reviewed upon a transcript, there is nothing presented that can be considered, and the appeal is dismissed. ¶3 All the Justices concur.