Tupelo Townsite Co. v. Cook
Tupelo Townsite Co. v. Cook
Opinion of the Court
V. S. Cook filed his petition in the court below against Tupelo Townsite Company et al., defendants, C. M. Witter not being made a defendant, for judgment and foreclosure of mortgage. S. B. Brooks, defendant, filed his cross-petition against Tupelo Townsite Company and C. M. Witter, for foreclosure of mortgage. On the 21st day of December, 1912, judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiff Cook and against Tupelo Townsite Company et al., and on the same day judgment was entered in favor of Brooks on his cross-petition and against Tupelo Townsite Company and C. M. Witter. A motion for a new trial was overruled as to both judgments. Case-made was prepared, served, and filed in this case, and S. B Brooks now moves to dismiss the appeal because C. M. Witter, *200 codefendant of Tupelo Townsite Company in the court below, is not made a party to this appeal, no summons in error being issued or waived.
The appeal, in so far as the judgment on the cross-petition of S. B. Brooks is concerned, must be dismissed, but this order of dismissal shall not affect the appeal with reference to the judgment rendered in favor of V. S. Cook against Tupelo Townsite Company et al. See C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Bradham, 24 Okla. 250, 103 Pac. 591; Watson v. Rein et al., 26 Okla. 47, 108 Pac. 397.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- TUPELO TOWNSITE CO. v. COOK Et Al.
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- APPEAL AND ERROR — Summons in Error — Dismissal. A petition in error will be dismissed on motion, even though the same is filed in this court within the six months allowed under the statute, where no waiver of issuance and service of summons in error is had, and no praecipe for the same filed, and no summons issued or general appearance made within such time. (Syllabus by the Court.)