Dixon v. Wingfield
This text of 1929 OK 388 (Dixon v. Wingfield) 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.
Opinion
Where the defendant in error has failed to file a brief, as provided for in rule 7 of the Supreme Court, or failed to give the court any excuse for such failure, and the brief of plaintiff in error reasonably sustains his assignments of error, the Supreme Court will not search the record to find some theory on which the judgment of the trial court, in favor of defendant in error, may be sustained.
This case clearly falls within the above rule, and the judgment or order is hereby reversed.
By the Court: It is so ordered.
Note. — See "Appeal and Error," 3 C. J. § 1607, p. 1447, n. 46.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1929 OK 388, 280 P. 1071, 139 Okla. 12, 1929 Okla. LEXIS 199, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dixon-v-wingfield-okla-1929.