Title: MANESS v. WILSON
Citation: 158 P. 37 0, 1916 OK 609, 53 Okla. 812
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: June 6, 1916

MANESS v. WILSON Annotate this Case MANESS v. WILSON 1916 OK 609 158 P. 370 53 Okla. 812 Case Number: 7041 Decided: 06/06/1916 Supreme Court of Oklahoma MANESS v. WILSON et al. Syllabus ¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Presentation for Review--Motions. Motions presented to the trial court, the rulings thereon, and exceptions thereto, are not properly a part of the record, and can only be presented and preserved for review on appeal to the Supreme Court by means of a bill of exceptions or case-made. Error from District Court, McClain County; R. McMillan, Judge. Action by J. R. Maness against Bird Wilson and another. From the judgment, Maness brings error. Dismissed. Glasco & Osborn, for plaintiffs in error. C. G. Moore, for defendants in error. TURNER, J. ¶1 This proceeding in error is to review the action of the court in dissolving a temporary injunction. The proceeding in error is attempted to be prosecuted by petition in error and transcript. Motion to dismiss is urged upon the ground that the error sought to be reviewed cannot be considered on a transcript. The motion must be sustained. In Craig v. Greer, 33 Okla. 302 , 124 P. 1096, the opinion reads: "This proceeding in error is to review the order of the lower court dissolving a temporary injunction. No case-made is attached to the petition in error. A motion to dismiss has been filed upon such ground, the contention being that the error sought to be reviewed cannot be brought before this court on a transcript. The proceeding in error must be dismissed. Green et al. v. Incorporated Town of Yeager, 23 Okla. 128 , 99 P. 906; Lamb et al. v. Young et al., 24 Okla. 614 , 104 P. 335; Nelson et al. v. Glenn et al., 28 Okla. 575 , 115 P. 471; Tribal Development Co. et al. v. White Bros et al., 28 Okla. 525 , 114 P. 736 ; Richardson et al. v. Beidleman, 33 Okla. 463 , 126 P. 816-818." ¶2 And in the syllabus to said case it was held: "Motions presented to the trial court, the rulings thereon, and exceptions thereto, are not properly a part of the record, and can only be presented and preserved for review on appeal to the Supreme Court by means of a bill of exceptions or case-made." ¶3 See, also, American Trust Co. et al. v. Ford et al., 31 Okla. 628 , 122 P. 186; Cable v. Myers, 43 Okla. 302 , 142 P. 1114. ¶4 Dismissed. ¶5 All the Justices concur.