McMeachan v. Christy

• Decision Date: 27 July 1895
• Citation: 41 P. 382,3 Okla. 301,1895 OK 41
• Parties: McMEACHAN v. CHRISTY.
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

41 P. 382

3 Okla. 301, 1895 OK 41

McMEACHAN v. CHRISTY.

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

July 27, 1895

Syllabus by the Court.

Under the Code of 1893, a motion to dismiss an appeal from the probate court to the district court, and a motion for a new trial, and the evidence taken on the trial in the district court, and the exceptions made to the various rulings of the district court upon these matters, are not a part of the record without a case made or bill of exceptions, and a transcript of the record of the district court presents no questions in this court for a review of the actions of the district court in its rulings upon such motions.

Appeal from district court, Kingfisher county; before Justice John H. Burford.

Action by T. P. Christy against T. F. McMeachan. There was a judgment for plaintiff on appeal to the district court, and orders denying a previous motion to dismiss the appeal, and a subsequent motion for new trial, and defendant brings error. Affirmed.

Hobbs & Kane, for plaintiff in error.

T. G Cutlip, for defendant in error.

BIERER J.

To the petition in error in this case is attached a transcript of the record of the court below, duly certified by the clerk of the district court. The errors assigned in the petition are to matters which occurred upon the trial, and to the overruling of the motion of plaintiff in error for a new trial, and to the overruling of the motion of plaintiff in error, made in the district court, to dismiss the appeal taken to that court from the judgment of the probate court. This transcript purports to contain all of the original pleadings filed in the probate court, and which were used upon the trial in the district court; the motion made by plaintiff in error in the district court to dismiss the appeal taken by defendant in error from the probate to the district court; the evidence offered in the case, with the rulings thereon; the verdict of the jury; the motion for a new trial; the judgment of the court overruling the same with the exceptions thereto; and a statement that 90 days' time was given defendant below, plaintiff in error here, to prepare a bill of exceptions. There is, however, no certificate showing that the judge of the district court ever signed the record as a bill of exceptions, or settled it as a case made. There is nothing attached to this record but the certificate of the clerk of the district court. This being the case, there is nothing presented to this court for review. None of the errors assigned arise upon the transcript of the record. The particular matter urged in this court by plaintiff in error, and opposed by defendant in error, is upon the...