LAWMASTER v. DONER.

LAWMASTER v. DONER.
1933 OK 44
18 P.2d 1064
162 Okla. 35
Case Number: 23809
Decided: 01/31/1933
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

LAWMASTER
v.
DONER

Syllabus

¶0 Appeal and Error--Order Overruling Motion to Discharge Attachment not Appealable Until Final Judgment.
An order of the district court overruling a motion to discharge a writ of attachment or garnishment proceedings is not reviewable in the Supreme Court until a final judgment has been rendered in the cause.

Appeal from District Court, Seminole County; George C. Crump, Judge.

Action by Otto Doner against Virgil D. Lawmaster. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Dismissed.

John T. Cooper, for plaintiff in error.
Billingsley & Stanley, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 A motion to dismiss this action was filed May 3, 1932, and to this a response was filed May 24, 1932.

¶2 It is admitted by all parties that prior to final judgment and after the case on appeal from the justice court was filed in the superior court of Seminole county, Okla., Virgil D. Lawmaster attempted to appeal to this court by petition in error and case-made from an order sustaining the garnishment proceedings.

¶3 In the case of Snyder v. Elliott, 26 Okla. 856, 110 P. 784, the court says:

"An order of the district court overruling a motion to discharge an attachment is not reviewable in the Supreme Court until a final judgment has been rendered in the case."

¶4 And in the case of Berry-Beall Dry Goods Co. v. Adams, 87 Okla. 291, 211 P. 79, the court says:

"A garnishment proceeding under the statutes of Oklahoma is so effectually an attachment that it is included within the term attachment."