WAYNE OIL TANK & PUMP CO. v. FIRST NAT. BANK

WAYNE OIL TANK & PUMP CO. v. FIRST NAT. BANK
1924 OK 58
222 P. 509
96 Okla. 290
Case Number: 12685
Decided: 01/15/1924
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

WAYNE OIL TANK & PUMP CO.
v.
FIRST NAT. BANK.

Syllabus

¶0 Appeal and Error--Preserving Error--Directing Verdict.
This court will not review a decision of the trial court in directing a verdict, unless the alleged error is presented to the trial court in a motion for new trial.

Error from District Court, Custer County; Thomas A. Edwards, Judge.

Henry Bulow, for plaintiff in error.
E. L. Mitchell, for defendant in error.

Action by the Wayne Oil Tank & Pump Company against the First National Bank of Clinton. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

COCHRAN, J.

¶1 The plaintiff in error states in its brief that the only specification of error which it desires to present is "that the trial court erred in instructing the jury to return a verdict for the defendant."

¶2 An examination of the record discloses that a motion for a new trial was filed in this case, but the alleged error in instructing a verdict for the defendant was not presented in the motion for anew trial. This court has repeatedly held that it will not review a decision of the trial court in directing a verdict raft ess the same is presented to the trial court by a motion for new trial. Brown & Bridgeman v. Western Casket Company, 30 Okla. 144, 120 P. 1001; Board of Com'rs. of Beaver County v. Langston et al., 41 Okla. 715, 139 P. 956; Ardmore Oil & Milling Co. v. Doggett Grain Co., 32 Okla. 280, 122 P. 241; Stump v. Porter et al., 31 Okla. 157, 120 P. 639.

¶3 The action of the trial court in directing a verdict not having been presented in the motion for new trial, this court will not review the alleged error. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.