WHITTINGTON v. TIDAL OIL COMPANY

WHITTINGTON v. TIDAL OIL COMPANY
1955 OK 14
279 P.2d 926
Case Number: 36665
Decided: 02/01/1955
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

W.G. WHITTINGTON, PETITIONER,

v.

TIDAL OIL COMPANY, NOW TIDEWATER OIL COMPANY, AND THE STATE INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, RESPONDENTS.

Syllabus of the Court

¶0 1. A proceeding brought to review an order or award of the State Industrial Commission not filed within the statutory period for review will be dismissed for the reason this Court is without jurisdiction to review the same.

Petition for review from the State Industrial Commission.

W.G. Whittington, Miami, pro se.

Harry D. Page, Tulsa, and Mac Q. Williamson, Atty. Gen., for respondents.

WILLIAMS, V.C.J.

¶1 W.G. Whittington, claimant, brought this proceeding to review an order of the State Industrial Commission denying him an award in a proceeding wherein he sought a further award against the employer, Tidal Oil Company, (now Tide Water Oil Company) on the ground of a change of condition. The petition to review states that it seeks to review an order dated October 3, 1923. It was filed October 5, 1954.

¶2 Answer in the nature of a motion to dismiss has been filed for the reason the proceeding was not commenced within 30 days after October 3, 1923. The motion to dismiss must be sustained. No record of the proceedings before the trial commissioner or the Commission en banc has been presented to this Court. This court has many times held that a proceeding to review an order or award of the State Industrial Commission not commenced within the statutory period set out in

¶3 At the time the order was made the statute provided for the commencement of proceedings within thirty days. Since the proceeding was not commenced within the time allowed by law the motion to dismiss must be sustained and the proceeding dismissed.

¶4 It is so ordered.