Legal Opinion · Dissent

Routh v. Tonini

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided May 25, 1943No. 31340Published

1DissentWelch, J.

In m;y view there appears no necessity to dismiss as to defendants in error Tonini and North River Insurance Company. There is not shown any reason why we may not proceed to full determination of all issues between these parties on the one hand, and the plaintiff in error on the other hand, without the presence of Cravens on appeal. I observe no showing of probable prejudice to the above-named defendants in error in so doing. I think the applicable rules justify the conclusion that the burden should be imposed on them and upon all who similarly seek dismissal of appeals to make such showing…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. City of Sapulpa v. YoungSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  2. Board of County Commissioners v. HarveySupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1897
  3. De Bolt v. Farmers' Exchange BankSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1915

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API