HARPER COUNTY EXCISE BD. v. PHILLIPS PIPE LINE CO.

Annotate this Case

HARPER COUNTY EXCISE BD. v. PHILLIPS PIPE LINE CO.
1943 OK 267
140 P.2d 596
192 Okla. 700
Case Number: 31444
Decided: 08/03/1943
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

HARPER COUNTY EXCISE BOARD
v.
PHILLIPS PIPE LINE CO.

Syllabus

¶0 TAXATION--Appeal from Court of Tax Review--Dismissal of appeal where petition in error not filed within ten days after notice of filing transcript.
That portion of Initiative Act No. 100 (68 O. S. 1941 § 337) requiring the party appealing to file in said cause with the Clerk of the Supreme Court a petition in error within ten days after the filing of the transcript on appeal means ten days after notice of the filing of the transcript on appeal, and is mandatory, and, where the same is not complied with, the appeal will be dismissed by this court upon its attention being called thereto.

Appeal from Court of Tax Review; Marvin Shilling, James T. Shipman, and Clarence Mills, Judges.

Proceeding by the Harper County Excise Board to review order of the Court of Tax Review in favor of the Phillips Pipe Line Company. Dismissed.

Merle Lansden, of Beaver, for plaintiff in error.
Mastin Geschwind, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 This is an appeal by the Harper county, Okla., excise board, plaintiff in error, from an order of the Court of Tax Review entered on the 23rd day of December, 1942. The transcript of the proceeding was filed on May 25, 1943, and due notice thereof given on the same date.

¶2 A motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason that the plaintiff in error has not complied with the provision of 68 O. S. 1941 § 337 by filing a petition in error as provided therein. In Protest of Kansas, O. & G. Ry. Co., Jasper Sipes Co. v. Excise Board of Pontotoc county, 164 Okla. 47, 22 P.2d 915, we held that the filing of petition in error within the time allowed by the above section was mandatory, and that the failure to comply with the above provision would work a dismissal. Since the petition *in error was not filed within the time required by law, the appeal is dismissed.

¶3 CORN, C.J., GIBSON, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.