BELLIS v. CRISSMAN

BELLIS v. CRISSMAN
1921 OK 277
200 P. 145
82 Okla. 207
Case Number: 10236
Decided: 07/12/1921
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

BELLIS
v.
CRISSMAN et al.

Syllabus

¶0 Appeal and Error--Failure to File Brief--Dismissal. When a case is pending in this court and is set for hearing on the regular printed docket and the plaintiff in error fails to file brief in compliance with rule No. 7 of this court, under said rule this court may exercise its discretion anti dismiss the appeal for failure to file brief.

T. G. Chambers, Jr., for plaintiff in error.
G. A. Paul, for defendants in error.

MILLER, J.

¶1 This action was commenced in the district court of Oklahoma county by John H. Bellis against R M. Crissman. I. B. Levy, and H. W. Pentecost, to recover on a building contractor's bond. A jury was duly impaneled and sworn to try said cause. The plaintiff introduced his evidence, and at the close of the evidence, defendants I. B. Levy and H. W. Pentecost demurred to the evidence for the reason that it was not sufficient to entitle plaintiff to recover as against defendants I. B. Levy and H. W. Pentecost, who were sureties on the bond. The court sustained the demurrer to the evidence. From this ruling of the court, the plaintiff appealed and appears here as plaintiff in error. This cause was regularly assigned for submission on June 14, 1921, on the printed docket of this court. The plaintiff in error has failed to file a brief. No reason is given why a brief has not been filed in compliance with rule No. 7 of this court (47 Okla. vi). In re Seizure One Chevrolet, Baby Grand Auto v. State of Oklahoma, No. 10282, 82 Okla. 202, 200 P. 144. This appeal is hereby dismissed, because the plaintiff in error has failed to file a brief.