# Hilligoss v. Webb

> Supreme Court of Oklahoma · July 25, 1916 · 60 Okla. 89

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3799666

## Case

- **Full name:** HILLIGOSS v. WEBB Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Oklahoma
- **Decided:** July 25, 1916
- **Citations:** 60 Okla. 89; 159 P. 291; 1916 Okla. LEXIS 1281
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Campbell
- **Judges:** Campbell
- **Cited by:** 4 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3799666

## Opinion text

Opinion by
CAMPBELL, C.
This action was commenced in the district court of Pon-totoc county for Hie recovery of a personal judgment against defendants. A general demurrer was sustained to the amended petition. and plaintiff elected to 'stand upon his petition and a judgment was rendered against plaintiff for costs. This proceeding in error was commenced by filing in this court a petition in error, with case-made attached, to have the judgment of the trial court reviewed. The record fails to show that the order of the trial court sustaining the general demurrer to the amended petition was entered of record in the trial court; also the record fails to show that the judgment of the trial court for costs against the plaintiff was entered of record in the trial court. Under numerous decisions of this court, the record presents no question for review for the above reasons.
In Graham v. Graham, 57 Okla. 672 , 157 Pac. 740 . it was held:
“A purported order of the trial court sustaining a demurrer to a petition is without force where the case-made fails to show affirmatively that such order was entered of record pursuant to sections 5143, 5324, Rev. Laws 1910.”
The petition in error with case-made attached was filed in this court on August 5, 1914, and this cause has been regularly assigned for submission and has been duly submitted, after notice to plaintiff in error. No brief has been filed as required by rule 7 of this court ( 38 Okla. x ), and no excuse offered by plaintiff in error for not having complied with such rule. It has been many times decided by this court under such condition that the appeal will be presumed to have been abandoned, and should be dismissed. Conness v. Brown, 44 Okla. 137 , 143 Pac. 852 .
For the reasons above suggested, the appeal is dismissed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3799666. Public record. Not legal advice.