[DOWNLOAD] "Hildebrand v. Harrison" by Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma * Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Hildebrand v. Harrison
- Author : Supreme Court of the State of Oklahoma
- Release Date : January 20, 1958
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 57 KB
Description
1 Plaintiffs in error, hereinafter referred to as appellants, lodged this appeal seeking a review of an adverse ruling on their attempt to obtain a new trial on the ground of "impossibility of making a case-made" in a quiet-title action, wherein judgment had been entered on December 16, 1955, against them, as defendants, and in favor of the defendant in error, as plaintiff, hereinafter referred to as appellee. One month after entry of the judgment, or on January 16, 1956, the court entered an order overruling appellants regular motion for a new trial. Later, on March 23, 1956, appellants filed a pleading entitled: "Amendment To Motion For A New Trial." Therein they alleged certain facts pertaining to a situation brought about by the incapacity of the court reporter, who had "worked" the trial, to transcribe his notes and to make a complete record of the proceedings thereat, and contemplated to show the impossibility of making a case-made for an appeal from the judgment in said action. On March 29, 1956, appellee filed a motion to strike this pleading, and, thereafter, on April 2, 1956 (a motion day of said court) at a hearing thereon, the above-described "Amendment To Motion For A New Trial" was overruled, and appellants gave notice of appeal from the courts ruling. Two days later, or on April 4, 1956, appellants filed in said cause a pleading entitled: "Petition For A New Trial", and caused a summons to be issued and served upon the appellee in an obvious effort to comply with the procedure prescribed by Tit. 12 O.S. 1951 § 655, for obtaining a new trial on grounds that "could not with reasonable diligence have been discovered before * * *", or the impossibility of making a case-made, that "arose after", the end of the term in which the judgment was entered. To this petition, the appellee filed a pleading called "Special Appearance, Motions To Quash and To Strike", which was later amended. Thereafter, at a hearing on June 11, 1956, the court upheld this pleading, and entered judgment striking appellants petition for new trial. From said judgment, they thereafter perfected the present appeal.