
    HURLEY v. CHILDERS et al.
    No. 11744
    Opinion Filed Feb. 15, 1921.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    Appeal and Error.— Case-Made — Extension of Time — Validity of Orders.
    When the time fixed for making and serving a case-made is allowed to elapse, the trial count thus loses jurisdiction of the cause, and an order subsequently made by the trial court extending the time for making and .serving a case-made is a nullity; and a ease-made, made and served by virtue of such'order of extension, is a nullity, and confers no jurisdiction upon this court.
    Error from District Court, Tillman County; Frank Mathews, Judge.
    Action by W. W. Childers and W. T. Mc-Williams against J. S. Hurley for injunction. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant brings error.
    Dismissed.
    Mounts & Williams, for plaintiff in error.
    Wilson & Roe, for defendants in error.
   NICHOLSON, J.

The motion to dismiss, to which there has been no response, urges that the case-made was not served within the time allowed by law or within any legal extension thereof.

The record in the case discloses that the last valid extension of the time within which to serve the case-made expired August 27, 1920; the case-made was not served on de fendants 'in error until the 22nd day of September, 1920; on September 20, 1920, anc September 22, 1920, plaintiff in error pro cured orders from the trial court purporting to extend the time for making and serving a case-made, but these orders, being after thf expiration of the time allowed by law or any legal extension thereof, are nullities. It has been held that when the time fixed for making and serving a case-made is allowed to elapse, the trial court thus loses jurisdiction of the case, and an order subsequently made by the trial court extending the time for making and serving a case-made is a nullity; and a ease-made, made and served by virtue of such order of extension, is a nullity, and confers no jurisdiction upon this court. Whitaker v. Wilkinson, 80 Okla. 21, 193 Pac. 735; Cook v. Cook, 79 Okla. 222, 191 Pac. 215; Cripple Creek Oil Co. v. King, 76 Okla. 316, 185 Pac. 439; Walker v. Reginald, 51 Okla. 10, 151 Pac. 680.

This appeal is therefore dismissed.

HARRISON, O. J., and PITCHFORD, Me-NEILL, and ELTING, JJ., concur, .  