Title: MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM Co v. DRAUVER
Citation: 178 Okla. 230, 1936 OK 725, 62 P.2d 474
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: November 17, 1936

MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM Co v. DRAUVER Annotate this Case MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM Co v. DRAUVER 1936 OK 725 62 P.2d 474 178 Okla. 230 Case Number: 26904 Decided: 11/17/1936 Supreme Court of Oklahoma MAGNOLIA PETROLEUM CO. v. DRAUVER Syllabus ¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR - Dismissal of Appeal on Jurisdictional Grounds in Accordance With Motion Where no Response Filed. Where the defendant in error has filed a motion to dismiss upon jurisdictional grounds, and this court has ordered the plaintiff in error to respond thereto and no response has been filed, it is not the duty of this court to inquire further into the jurisdiction where the authorities cited by the movant reasonably sustain the lack of jurisdiction. Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; G.H. Giddings, Judge. Action by P.D. Drauver and others against the Magnolia Petroleum Company and another for injunctive relief. From a judgment for the plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Dismissed. W.R. Wallace and Everest, McKenzie & Gibbens, for plaintiffs in error. Jarman & Brown and T.F. Weiss, for defendants in error. PER CURIAM. ¶1 This case arises upon a motion to dismiss for the reason that the order is not an appealable order and for the further reason that the appeal was not perfected in time. On June 23, 1936, the plaintiffs in error were directed by this court to respond to the motion to dismiss, and no response has been filed. In French v. Bragg, 177 Okla. 43 , 55 P.2d 953, we said: "Where the defendant in error has filed a motion to dismiss upon jurisdictional grounds, and this court has ordered the plaintiff in error to respond thereto and no response has been filed, it is not the duty of this court to inquire further into the jurisdiction where the authorities cited by the movant reasonably sustain the lack of jurisdiction." ¶2 The appeal is therefore dismissed.