Opinion

Cecil v. Board of County Commissioners

  • 10 Okla. 354
  • 61 P. 1065
  • 1900 OK 59
  • 1900 Okla. LEXIS 36
Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma
Filed
Jun 30, 1900
Status
Published
Author
McAtee
On the bench
McAtee, Irwin
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Opinion of the court by

McAtee, J.:

Tbis is an appeal from the board of county commissioners of Washita county, to the district court of that county, from an order of the board, declaring, as the result of an election upon the subject, that “stock should be restrained from running at large in township ten, range twenty, in Washita county.” The order of the board of county commissioners was affirmed in the district court, and the case is brought here upon a transcript certified by the clerk of the district court, that “the aboye and foregoing transcript contains a true full and correct copy of the petition, transcript, notice of appeal, journal entry of judgment, and bill of exceptions, as the same appear on file and of record.”

The judgment of the district court was, that “from and after this date, stock shall be restrained from running at large in township ten, range twenty, Washita county, and that tbe provisions of the herd law be in force and effecr in said township, and that the order of the board of county commissioners of said county be affirmed.” The assignment of error is that the court erred in giving judgment for the appellee below.

In order to review the judgment here, and the questions presented in the briefs, it would be necessary to determine the result of the election in qustion, as found-upon a canvass of the votes by the board of county com-

*356

rnissioners; the poll list oí all votes in township ten, range twenty; testimony touching the number of resident voters in the township, and the number of votes cast at the election for and against the proposition to restrain stock from running at large; and while there are some papers apparently purporting to be copies of certificates and affidavits showing these points, yet, they are not "brought here in such a form as to be proper subject for consideration in this court. These are matters of evidence, and should be brought here by á case-made or a proper bill of exceptions. There is no statement or certificate in the record that it contains the evidence, or the whole or any part of it.

The judgment of the district court will, therefore, be .affirmed.

Irwin, J., having presided in the court below, not sitting; all of the other Justices concurring.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.