
    BENDER v. BENDER et al.
    
    No. 1189.
    Opinion Filed November 18, 1911.
    (119 Pac. 205.)
    APPEAL AND ERROR — Dismissal—Failure to File Brief. Where plaintiff in error .files no brief, as required by rule 7 of this court (20 OHa. viii, 95 Pac. vi), the appeal will be dismissed for want of . prosecution.
    (Syllabus by,Brewer, 0.)
    
      Error from District Court, Alfalfa County; M. C. Garber, Judge.
    
    Action by Luella Bender, administratrix of Frank Bender, against William Bender and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiff brings error.
    Dismissed.
    
      Titus, Carpenter & Davis, for plaintiff in error.
    
      E. W. Snoddy, for defendants in error
   Opinion by

BREWER, C.

The petition in error and transcript of the record in this case was filed in this court November 4, 1909. The plaintiff in error has failed to file any brief in the cause, as required by.rule 7 of this court (20 Okla. viii, 95 Pac. vi). The petition in error should therefore be dismissed, for want of prosecution. Hass et al. v. McCampbell, 27 Okla. 290, 111 Pac. 543; Maddin v. McCormick et al., 27 Okla. 778, 117 Pac. 200; McClelland v. Witherall, infra, 119 Pac. 205; Cox v. Rogers, infra, 119 Pac. 205.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

All the Justices concur.  