
    NICHOLS & SHEPARD CO. v. DUNNINGTON, Adm’r.
    No. 15190
    Opinion Filed June 8, 1926.
    Appeal and Error — Failure to. File Brief— Dismissal.
    “Where a cause has been regularly assigned for submission and tbe plaintiff in error fails to file brief, or offer any excuse for sucli failure, it will be presumed lihat tbe appeal has been abandoned, and the same will be dismissed.” Corbin v. Shar-rock, 92 Okla. 194, 218 Pac. 798.
    (Syllabus by Dickson, O.)
    Commissioners’ Opinion, Division No. 4.
    Error from District Court, Alfalfa County; J. 0. Bobberts, Judge.
    Action by Nichols ,& Shepard Company against Carl S. Dunningtoh personally, and as administrator of the estate of Boy Mes-sick, deceased. Frota judgment dismissing, said action, plaintiff has appealed.
    Dismissed.
    
      ■ Schwinn, Taggart & Bradley, and Titus & Taltoot, for plaintiff in error.
    . Note.—See 3 C. J. p. 1444 §1607; 4 C. J. p. 581 §2380 ; 2 K. C. L. p. 176; 1 R. C. L. Supp. p. 425 ; 5 R. O. L. Supp. p. 77.
   Opinion by

DICKSON, C.

The plaintiff in error, as plaintiff, commenced this action in the 1 district court of Alfalfa county, for the purpose of obtaining a decree vacating and holding for naught an order of the county court of said county appointing Carl S. Dunnington administrator of the estate of Boy Messick, deceased. A demurrer was sustained to the plaintiff’s petition, and the plaintiff elected to stand upon its petition, and the acción was dismissed.

Th,e plaintiff in error has appealed to this court by petition in error with ease-made attached. The record was filed in this court ota March 14, 1924, and the case duly assigned ior consideration. The plaintiff in error has failed to file a brief in this case as required by ru'le 7 of this court. No excuse is offered for such failure. The appeal is therefore dismissed.

By the Court: It is so ordered.  