
    PERRY v. WERLINE.
    No. 9562
    Opinion Filed Jan. 13, 1920.
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    Appeal and Error — Jurisdiction—Time to File Petition in Error.
    Under chapter 18, Sess. Laws 1910-11, proceedings in error in the Supreme Court must be brought within six months from the date of the rendition of the judgment, or order from which the appeal is sought to be taken, and, when not so brought, this court is without jurisdiction to review such final order.
    Error from County Court, .Ellis County; S. A. Miller, Judge.
    On motion to dismiss appeal from judgment in favor of George M. Werline against George Perry.
    Motion sustained, and appeal dismissed.
    C. B. Leedy, for plaintiff in error.
    J. W. Burrow, for defendant in error.
   RAINEY, J.

This is an appeal' from a judgment rendered by the county court of Ellis county. The defendant in error has filed motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the petition in error was- not filed in this court within six months from the date of rendition of the judgment appealed from. An examination of the record discloses that the judgment herein was rendered on November 13, 1916; the motion for new trial was overruled by the court below on November 15, 1916; and the petition in error was filed in this court November 2, 1917, almost a year after the rendition of final judgment in the trial court. Section 1, chap. 18, Sess. Laws 1910-11, provides:

“All proceedings for reversing, vacating or modifying judgments, or final orders, shall be commenced within six months from the rendition of the judgment or final order complained of.”

This is jurisdictional; and where, as in this ease, more than six months has elapsed, this court is without authority to review the action of the trial court. Boorigie Bros. v. Ranney-Davis Mer. Co., 47 Okla. 97, 147 Pac. 774; Malloy v. Johnson et al., 40 Okla. 454, 139 Pac. 310; State Savings Bank of Manchester, Iowa, v. Redden et al., 38 Okla. 444, 134 Pac. 20; Storm v. Richart, 49 Okla. 587, 153 Pac. 863.

The proceeding is therefore dismissed.

KANE, PITCHFORD, JOHNSON, MC-NEILL, HIGGINS, and BAILEY, JJ., concur.  