FITE v. VAN ANTWERP

LATHIM v. SCHLACK
1911 OK 97
114 P. 608
28 Okla. 471
Case Number: 1669
Decided: 03/21/1911
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

LATHIM
v.
SCHLACK.

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Dismissal--Absence of Brief. Where no briefs have been filed by plaintiff in error within the time required by rule of court, and no resistance offered to a motion to dismiss on that ground, and no leave asked to file briefs out of time, the motion to dismiss ought to be sustained.

Error from District Court, Pittsburg County; Preslie B. Cole, Judge.

Action between J. M. Lathim and G. D. Schlack. From the judgment, Lathim brings error. Dismissed.

Chester A. Leinbach, for plaintiff in error.
Arnote & Rogers, for defendant in error.

KANE, J.

¶1 This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to strike the case-made from the files and to dismiss the appeal, upon the ground that no briefs have been filed by the plaintiff in error within 40 days of the filing of the petition in error, as required by rule of the Supreme Court. The record shows that the petition in error was filed on the 9th day of May, 1910, and up to this date no briefs have been filed, and no showing made by plaintiff in error why they have not been filed, nor any extension of time asked within which to file the same.

¶2 The motion to dismiss ought to be sustained. It is so ordered.

¶3 All the Justices concur.