Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

41 Okla. 409

138 P 807

Prochnau v. Marten

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided February 10, 1914

Supreme Court of Oklahoma · decided 1914-02-10

<p> Error from District Court, Major County; </p> <p>Action by B. B. Marten against Dan Proehnau. Judgment . for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1941

1 state decisions

Relies on Simpson v. Henderson-Sturges Piano Co. · St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. McCollum Baker

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Affirmed · Decided 1914-02-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 Opinion by

BREWER, C.

¶2 This cause was dismissed by this court in a former opinion, for the reason that the final judgment had not been brought into the record. Since then the parties by agreement have been permitted to amend by bringing the judgment into the record, which is here certified as a transcript. The errors'assigned are: First, that the petition filed in this case . does not state a cause of action. Second, error in overruling the motion for new trial.

¶3 The second error alleged cannot be considered on transcript. None of the evidence is before the court. To have considered matters occurring at the trial the proceedings thereof must be preserved and presented here for review on bill of exceptions or case-made. Simpson v. Henderson-Sturges Piano Co., 31 Okla. 623, 122 Pac. 174; St. L. & S. F. R. Co. v. McCollum & Baker, 23 Okla. 899, 101 Pac. 1120.

¶4 The first ground alleged as error is not sound. We have examined the petition carefully, and think it very clearly and unquestionably states a cause of action. A very close study of appellant’s contentions in the brief and the one authority he cites fails to shake this conclusion. To set the petition out and discuss 'it would serve no good purpose, as no new or interesting question 'is presented.

¶5 The cause should be affirmed.

¶6 By the Court: It is so ordered.

/41/okla/409 · .json · Public domain