From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bennett et al. v. Abbott

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Feb 1, 1916
154 P. 1156 (Okla. 1916)

Opinion

No. 6142

Opinion Filed February 1, 1916.

APPEAL AND ERROR — Death of Party — Dismissal. One of the plaintiffs in error died pending proceedings in error and before submission in this court. Nothing was done to revive the action, and the year (sec. 5294, Rev. Laws 1910) expired. The defendant in error, without consenting to a revivor, moved to dismiss. Held that the action is barred by the statute, and the appeal is ordered dismissed.

(Syllabus by Mathews, C.)

Error from District Court, Bryan County; Jesse M. Hatchett, Judge.

Action by Charles P. Abbott against Florence Bennett and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error. Dismissed.

Porter Newman, for plaintiffs in error.

McPherren Cochran, for defendant in error.


On January 5, 1916, the defendant in error filed a motion to dismiss this appeal, alleging therein that W.D. Coleman, one of the plaintiffs in error, died on December 14, 1914, that a joint judgment was rendered in the trial court against both of the plaintiffs in error, and that this action has not been revived in the name of the administrator of the estate of the said W.D. Coleman.

This appeal was perfected on March 12, 1914, and submitted December 13, 1915. There has been no effort made to revive the same. Following the rule laid down in McKay v. Watson et al., 40 Okla. 353, 137 P. 1177, we recommend that the appeal be dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Bennett et al. v. Abbott

Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Feb 1, 1916
154 P. 1156 (Okla. 1916)
Case details for

Bennett et al. v. Abbott

Case Details

Full title:BENNETT et al. v. ABBOTT

Court:Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Date published: Feb 1, 1916

Citations

154 P. 1156 (Okla. 1916)
154 P. 1156

Citing Cases

Harrod v. Adams

"Under section 5294, Rev. Laws 1910, providing an order to revive an action against the representatives or…

Edwards v. Asher

This statute is not in conflict with section 5294, Revised Laws 1910, and both statutes should be given…