Eisiminger v. Kelly

1930 OK 463, 288 P. 316, 146 Okla. 272, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 331
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedOctober 21, 1930
Docket21173
StatusPublished
Cited by40 cases

This text of 1930 OK 463 (Eisiminger v. Kelly) 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
Eisiminger v. Kelly, 1930 OK 463, 288 P. 316, 146 Okla. 272, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 331 (Okla. 1930).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from the judgment of the district court of Oklahoma county. The plaintiff in error was plaintiff below. The plaintiff in error in due time served and filed his brief in full compliance with the rules of this court, but the defendant in error has wholly failed to file any brief, pleading, or to otherwise appear in this court on the merits of the cause, nor has he offered any excuse for his failure to do so.

“Where plaintiff in error has served and filed its brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for his failure to do so, this court is not required to search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment of the trial court may be sustained, but may, where the authorities cited in the brief filed, appear reasonably to sustain the assignments of error., reverse the cause, with directions, in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error.” City National Bank v. Coatney, 122 Okla. 233, 253 Pac. 481.

In this case the petition in error prays that the judgment be reversed, directing the court below to vacate its former judgment and enter judgment for plaintiff in error, and we find, upon examination of the authorities cited by the plaintiff in error, they reasonably support the contention of the plaintiff, and we therefore reverse the judgment of the lower court and direct it to vacate its former judgment and enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff in error.

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

Related

Oec v. Og&e
1999 OK 35 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1999)
Oklahoma Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co.
1999 OK 35 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1999)
State Ex Rel. Cartwright v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.
1983 OK 40 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1983)
Opinion No. 78-185 (1978) Ag
Oklahoma Attorney General Reports, 1978
State v. Oklahoma Gas and Electric Company
536 P.2d 887 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1975)
Oklahoma Gas & Electric Co. v. Total Energy, Inc.
1972 OK 108 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1972)
Greater Wilmington Transportation Authority v. Kline
285 A.2d 819 (Superior Court of Delaware, 1971)
Gibson v. Elmore City Telephone Company
1966 OK 30 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1966)
State Ex Rel. Williamson v. Garrison
1959 OK 260 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1959)
Wadley v. American Window Glass Company
1959 OK 132 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1959)
Choctaw Electric Co-Operative, Inc. v. Redman
293 P.2d 564 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1954)
Georgia Power Co. v. Georgia Public Service Commission
85 S.E.2d 14 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1954)
Halifax Paper Co. v. Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
61 S.E.2d 378 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1950)
Ex Parte Houston
224 P.2d 281 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1950)
Wilson & Co. v. Oklahoma Gas & Elec. Co.
1942 OK 152 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1942)
Croxton v. State
1939 OK 504 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1939)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1930 OK 463, 288 P. 316, 146 Okla. 272, 1930 Okla. LEXIS 331, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eisiminger-v-kelly-okla-1930.