American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Watson

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Watson

1936 OK 102, 54 P.2d 340, 175 Okla. 628, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 65

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 4, 1936

DocketNo. 26606.

StatusPublished

This text of 1936 OK 102 (American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Watson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Watson, 1936 OK 102, 54 P.2d 340, 175 Okla. 628, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 65 (Okla. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this cause, the plaintiff obtained a judgment in foreclosure and so’d the premises, bought them in and filed his' application for an order confirming the sale. The court ordered the sheriff to withhold the deed until the plaintiff remitted tlje excess between the judgment and the amount bid. Of this order the plaintiff in error complains on appeal and has filed a brief which reasonably supports its contentions of error. Defendant in error has filed no brief and offers no excuse for such failure. On the face of the record and the brief of plaintiff, we are reasonably assured of the error of which plaintiff complains. We are not required further to search the record to find some theory to sustain the defendant below.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order of confirma *629 tion entered and to enter an order confirming the sale without relation to the excess judgment, as prayed for in the petition in error.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

In this cause, the plaintiff obtained a judgment in foreclosure and so’d the premises, bought them in and filed his' application for an order confirming the sale. The court ordered the sheriff to withhold the deed until the plaintiff remitted tlje excess between the judgment and the amount bid. Of this order the plaintiff in error complains on appeal and has filed a brief which reasonably supports its contentions of error. Defendant in error has filed no brief and offers no excuse for such failure. On the face of the record and the brief of plaintiff, we are reasonably assured of the error of which plaintiff complains. We are not required further to search the record to find some theory to sustain the defendant below.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order of confirma *629 tion entered and to enter an order confirming the sale without relation to the excess judgment, as prayed for in the petition in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1936 OK 102, 54 P.2d 340, 175 Okla. 628, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 65, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-savings-loan-assn-v-watson-okla-1936.