BOARD OF COMM'RS OF CADDO COUNTY v. DIETRICH

BOARD OF COMM'RS OF CADDO COUNTY v. DIETRICH
1915 OK 789
152 P. 341
49 Okla. 267
Case Number: 7269
Decided: 10/12/1915
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF CADDO COUNTY
v.
DIETRICH et al.

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Parties--Dismissal. All persons against whom a joint judgment has been rendered must be made parties to a proceeding in error to reverse such judgment, and a failure to join any of them, either as plaintiffs or defendants, is ground for the dismissal of the cause.

Error from District Court, Caddo County; J. T. Johnson, Judge.

Action by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Caddo against W. F. Dietrich and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error.

Theo. Pruett, Asst. Co. Atty., for plaintiff in error.
A. J. Morris, for defendants in error.

KANE, C. J.

¶1 This cause comes on to be heard upon a motion to dismiss the proceeding in error, filed by the defendants in error for the reason, among other things, that:

"The judgment from which the appeal herein is prosecuted is a joint judgment, and O. M. Hite, J.

¶2 A. Dinkler, Louis E. McKnight, W. E. Turner, A. Youngheim, Frank Carpenter, J. A. Menefee, and A. N. Benedict" --who are parties thereto, have not been served with the case-made herein and are not parties to the proceeding, and this court, therefore, has no jurisdiction to review said judgment. This contention seems to be well supported by the authorities.

¶3 Weisbender v. School District, 24 Okla. 173, 103 P. 639, and Southwestern Surety Ins. Co. v. Hall, 40 Okla. 447, 139 P. 305, cited by counsel for defendants in error in support of their motion, seem to be entirely in point. The motion to dismiss is not resisted by the plaintiff in error.

¶4 For the reason stated the motion to dismiss is sustained.

¶5 All the Justices concur.