Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Garfield Cnty. v. Charles
| Decision Date | 05 September 1907 |
| Citation | 92 P. 152,1907 OK 98,19 Okla. 173 |
| Parties | BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF GARFIELD COUNTY v. CHARLES V. PORTER et al. |
| Court | Oklahoma Supreme Court |
¶0 WRIT OF ERROR--Case-Made--Time of Service. A party desiring to appeal has three days by statute in which to serve a case after a judgment or order is entered, and unless such case is served within that time, or within an extension of time allowed by the court or judge within such time, the case will not be considered in this court.
Error from the District Court of Garfield County; before James K. Beauchamp, Trial Judge.
Dismissed.
Daniel Huett, County Attorney, for plaintiff in error.
R. L. Denton, for defendant in error.
¶1 The defendant in error, Porter, served two terms as sheriff of Garfield county. The other defendants in error were sureties on his official bond. The board of county commissioners allowed and paid him for transporting prisoners to the penitentiary, and for transporting insane persons. This is an action to recover the moneys so illegally allowed and paid. The defendants in error pleaded the settlements with the county board as an estoppel. The district court heard the case upon an agreed statement of facts and gave judgment for the defendants in error, upon the grounds that the settlements with the county board were conclusive unless set aside for fraud. The county now appeals.
¶2 The questions involved are of great public import and ought to be determined. But we are met with the objection that there is no sufficient record in this court upon which it can entertain jurisdiction. The case is here upon what purports to be a case-made, but it is insisted by the defendants in error that it was never properly served. The statute provides (Wilson's Rev. & Ann. St. 1903 § 4741): "The case so made or a copy thereof shall, within three days after the judgment or order is entered, be served upon the opposite party or his attorney, who may within three days thereafter suggest amendments thereto in writing and present the same to the party making the case or his attorney. * * * " Section 4742: "The court or judge may, upon good cause shown, extend the time for making a case and the time in which the case may be served." It follows from these provisions that the party desiring to have a judgment or order reviewed by the supreme court must prepare and serve his case upon the opposite party within three days after the judgment or order is entered, unless the court for good cause has extended the time, and an extension of time must be granted within the original time fixed by law or as extended by the court or judge. The court has no power to grant an extension of time to serve a case after the expiration of the time allowed by statute, unless within that time an extension has been given which has not expired. A case served after the time for serving same has elapsed is of no validity. Abel v. Blair, 3 Okla. 399, 41 P. 342; Polson v. Purcell et al., 4 Okla. 93, 46 P. 578; Horner v. Christy, 4 Okla. 553, 46 P. 561; Sigman v. Poole, 5 Okla. 677, 49 P. 944. The judgment was entered on April 28, 1906, and no extension was given for the making and serving of a case. On the same day a motion for new trial was filed, which was overruled on May 8, 1906. At this time plaintiff in error requested an extension of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wentz v. Thomas
...of facts." Barnett v. Tabor, 154 Okla. 20, 6 P.2d 787; St. L. & S. F. Ry. Co., v. Nelson, 40 Okla. 143, 136 P. 590; Bd. Co. Com'rs v. Porter, 19 Okla. 173, 92 P. 152; C., R. I & P. Ry. Co. v. Shawnee, 39 Okla. 728, 136 P. 591; Sch. Dist. No. 38 v. Mackey, 44 Okla. 408, 144 P. 1032,; Dunlap ......
-
Garland v. Union Trust Co.
...from the date of the rendition. of the judgment, unaffected by such motion or the order overruling the same. Board of County Commissioners v. Porter et al., 19 Okla. 173, 92 P. 152; Stannard v. Sampson et ux., 23 Okla. 13, 99 P. 796; St. L. & S. F. R. Co. v. Nelson, 40 Okla. 143, 136 P. 590......
-
Stanard v. Sampson
...and consequences of which issues of law arise, are argued and determined by the court." ¶8 In the case of Board of County Commissioners v. Porter et al. 19 Okla. 173, 92 P. 152, the court held that where a case is submitted to the court solely upon the pleadings and an agreed statement of f......
-
First Nat. Bank of Shawnee v. Okla. Nat. Bank of Shawnee
...as an agreed statement, and the law of a motion for new trial under such a condition is stated in the case of Board of County Com'rs v. Porter et al., 19 Okla. 173, 92 P. 152, as follows: "The case was submitted upon the pleadings and an agreed statement of facts. There was no necessity for......