Carter v. Fowler

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Carter v. Fowler

1928 OK 109, 264 P. 141, 129 Okla. 218, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 389

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 14, 1928

Docket18612

StatusPublished

This text of 1928 OK 109 (Carter v. Fowler) 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

Carter v. Fowler, 1928 OK 109, 264 P. 141, 129 Okla. 218, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 389 (Okla. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error has served and filed brief as required by the rules of this court. Defendant in error has failed to file brief or offer any excuse for not so doing, although the time therefor has long since expired.

We have examined the brief of plaintiff in error, and its assignments of error are reasonably supported by the authorities cited therein. This court is not required to and will not search the record to find a reason why the judgment appealed from should be sustained. The petition in error filed in this court prays that the judgment of the trial court be reversed, set aside, *219 and held for naught and that plaintiff in error be restored to all rights lost by reason of the rendition of this judgment. Under the holdings of this court, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded for new trial. Home State Bank v. Oklahoma State Bank, 51 Okla. 368, 151 Pac. 1044.

It is so ordered.

Note.—See 3 C. J. p. 1441, §1604 1/2 (Anno).

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

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff in error has served and filed brief as required by the rules of this court. Defendant in error has failed to file brief or offer any excuse for not so doing, although the time therefor has long since expired.

We have examined the brief of plaintiff in error, and its assignments of error are reasonably supported by the authorities cited therein. This court is not required to and will not search the record to find a reason why the judgment appealed from should be sustained. The petition in error filed in this court prays that the judgment of the trial court be reversed, set aside, *219 and held for naught and that plaintiff in error be restored to all rights lost by reason of the rendition of this judgment. Under the holdings of this court, the judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded for new trial. Home State Bank v. Oklahoma State Bank, 51 Okla. 368, 151 Pac. 1044.

It is so ordered.

Note.—See 3 C. J. p. 1441, §1604 1/2 (Anno).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1928 OK 109, 264 P. 141, 129 Okla. 218, 1928 Okla. LEXIS 389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-fowler-okla-1928.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack