WELLS v. CHILDERS

Annotate this Case

THOMPSON v. MURRAY
1912 OK 554
125 P. 1133
34 Okla. 521
Case Number: 2655
Decided: 08/20/1912
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

THOMPSON et al.
v.
MURRAY.

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Writ of Error--Dismissal. The petition in error and case-made were filed and summons in error issued May 29, 1911. On June 23d defendant in error moved to have the petition in error made more definite and certain, by stating the names of the plaintiffs in error on behalf of whom the petition was prosecuted, which motion was sustained in September 12th. This order was never complied with, and on May 9, 1912, defendant in error moved to dismiss because of such failure, and also because the case had never been briefed. Held that, no response having been made to the motion, nor application made for leave to file briefs out of time, or to then comply with the order, the motion would be sustained.

J. B. Thompson, for plaintiffs in error.
Carr & Field, for defendant in error.

AMES, C.

¶1 On May 29, 1911, the petition in error and case-made were filed and summons in error issued. On June 23d the defendant in error filed a motion to make the petition in error more definite and certain, by stating the names of the plaintiffs in error on behalf of whom the petition in error was prosecuted. On September 12th this motion was sustained. The order of the court has never been complied with. On May 9, 1912, the defendant in error filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for two reasons--one because the case had never been briefed by the plaintiffs in error, as required by the rules of the court, and the other because the order of the court requiring the petition in error to be made more definite and certain had never been complied with. No response has ever been made to this motion, nor has any application been made for leave to file briefs out of time, or make the petition more definite and certain, as required by the order of the court. The motion to dismiss the appeal should therefore be sustained.

¶2 By the Court: It is so ordered.

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.