City of Atoka v. McNeil

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

City of Atoka v. McNeil

1952 OK 389, 250 P.2d 29, 207 Okla. 403, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 807

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedNovember 12, 1952

DocketNo. 34981

StatusPublished

This text of 1952 OK 389 (City of Atoka v. McNeil) 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

City of Atoka v. McNeil, 1952 OK 389, 250 P.2d 29, 207 Okla. 403, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 807 (Okla. 1952).

Pincite

Opinion

GIBSON, J.

Plaintiffs in error have appealed from a judgment entered against them in the trial court, and on January 5, 1952, they filed their brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants in error have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Fore v. Fore, 203 Okla. 75, 218 P. 2d 366, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause will be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment for the defendants in error and enter judgment for the plaintiffs in error as prayed for in the petition in error.

HALLEY, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, JOHNSON, O’NEAL, and BING-AMAN, JJ., concur.

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

GIBSON, J.

Plaintiffs in error have appealed from a judgment entered against them in the trial court, and on January 5, 1952, they filed their brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants in error have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Fore v. Fore, 203 Okla. 75, 218 P. 2d 366, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause will be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment for the defendants in error and enter judgment for the plaintiffs in error as prayed for in the petition in error.

HALLEY, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, JOHNSON, O’NEAL, and BING-AMAN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1952 OK 389, 250 P.2d 29, 207 Okla. 403, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 807, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-atoka-v-mcneil-okla-1952.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack