38 Okla. 365
132 P 1085
Decided June 10, 1913
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · decided 1913-06-10
<p> Error from Superior 1Court, Garfield County; Dan Duett, Judge. </p> <p>Action by P. B. Dilday against S. W. Napier and others. Judgment for -plaintiff, and defendants bring error.</p>
Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 2002
2 state decisions
Relies on Baker v. Van Ness
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Dismissed · Decided 1913-06-10
View the full empirical analysis of this case →
¶1 The record shows that the finding made against the plaintiffs in error, upon which the judgment was rendered, was with the consent of their counsel. Consent ends all contention between the parties,- and there is nothing to- review on appeal. Baker v. Van Ness et al., 37 Okla. 122, 130 Pac. 536; Schmidt v. Oregon Gold Mining Co., 28 Ore. 9, 40 Pac. 406, 1014, 52 Am. St. Rep. 759, and authorities therein cited. ■
¶2 The proceeding in error is dismissed.