JETT et al. v. GROOMS et al.

JETT et al. v. GROOMS et al.
1933 OK 557
27 P.2d 148
166 Okla. 277
Case Number: 20704
Decided: 10/24/1933
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

JETT et al.
v.
GROOMS et al.

Syllabus

¶0 Appeal and Error--Review--Sufficiency of Evidence to Support Finding That Claimant of Real Estate Sold on Execution Intervening After Sale Was not Owner of Property.
Where, after a sale of real estate on execution, one intervenes in the action, claims title to the real estate sold, and objects to the confirmation thereof, and the trial court finds from the evidence that the intervener is not the owner thereof, such finding and judgment based thereon will not be disturbed by this court it there is any competent evidence reasonably tending to support the same.

Appeal from District Court, Tillman County; Frank Mathews, Judge.

Execution sale to satisfy judgment in favor of George Grooms et al. against W. J. Jett et al.; Anna B. Jett intervening. From adverse judgment, intervener appeals. Affirmed.

Mounts & Chamberlin, for plaintiffs in error.
Bailey & McLaury, for defendants in error.

ANDREWS, J.

¶1 Heretofore this court in cause No. 10257, Grooms v. Grooms, dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution and rendered judgment against W. J. Jett and others, sureties on the appeal bond. Execution was issued on that judgment out of the trial court, which was levied on certain real estate, which real estate was sold at sheriff's sale. While the return of the sale as pending in the trial court for confirmation, Anna B. Jett intervened, alleged that the land belonged to her, and asked that the sale be set aside. W. J. Jett filed an affidavit in which he alleged irregularities in the proceedings, resulting in a final judgment. After a hearing was had, the sale was confirmed.

¶2 From that judgment Anna B. Jett appealed and W. J. Jett attempted to appeal. The record does not show that he gave notice of appeal, and he is not a proper party plaintiff in this case.

¶3 The only question presented on the appeal of which Anna B. Jett is entitled to complain, under the rule stated in Millard v. Nelson, 139 Okla. 56, 281 P. 238; Severson v. Bemore, 137 Okla. 50, 278 P. 327, Griggs v. Brandon, 132 Okla. 180, 269 P. 1052; Kline v. Evans, 103 Okla. 44, 229 P. 427; Brazell v. Brockins, 95 Okla. 38, 217 P. 847, and the provisions of section 456, O. S. 1931, is that the trial court erred in finding and determining that the property was not the property of the intervener, Anna B. Jett.

¶4 The finding and judgment of the trial court with reference to that issue is amply supported by the evidence, and that finding and judgment will not be disturbed.

¶5 The judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.