
    MYERS, Co. Treas., et al. v. BOWLING.
    No. 14124
    Opinion Filed June 5, 1923.
    (Syllabus.)
    Appeal and Error — Record — Review on Transcript.
    Where a case has been submitted to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts, thereby eliminating all issues of fact, a motion for new trial is unnecessary . to bring errors presentable by transcript, but where no motion for judgment on pleadings has been made and exceptions saved and no case-made attached to petition in error, the transcript presents nothing for review, and Ihe appeal may be dismissed.
    Error from District Court, Garvin County; W. L. Eagleton, Judge.
    Action between R, E. Bowling and J. F. Myers, County Treasurer, and the Board of Commissioners of Garvin County. From the judgment, the latter bring error.
    Dismissed.
    Mac Q. Williamson, County Atty., for plaintiffs in error.
    Bowling & Farmer, for defendant in error.
   HARRISON, J.

Motion to dismiss this appeal was filed with proof of service May 12, 1923, for the reason :

(1) That the cause having been submitted on agreed statement of facts, no motion for new trial was necessary, and that such motion saves no question for review.

(2) That the record fails to show jurisdiction of the district court to hear and determine'the matter.

(3) That the record attached to the petition in error is neither a transcript, bill of exceptions, nor case-made. .

The cause having been submitted to the trial court on an agreed statement of facts, all issues of fact were thereby eliminated. A motion for new trial is unnecessary in such case. Garland v. Union Trust Co., 49 Okla. 654, 154 Pac. 676; Hutchinson v. Brown, 66 Okla. 250, 167 Pac. 624; St. L. & S. F. R. Co. v. Nelson, 40 Okla. 143, 136 Pac. 590; School Dist. No. 38 v. Mackey, 44 Okla. 408, 144 Pac. 1032: Stanard v. Sampson, 23 Okla. 13, 99 Pac. 796.

No motion for judgment on pleadings having been made, and the cause having:, been submitted on an agreed statement of facts, there appears to be. nothing which would justify a reversal. In treating the record as a transcript, there being no complete ■ case-made, the record presents nothing for this court to review; therefore the motion is sustained and appeal dismissed.

JOHNSON, C. J.. and KANE, KENNA-MER, and BRANSON, J.T.. concur.  