Fair v. Burtschi

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Fair v. Burtschi

1934 OK 156, 30 P.2d 673, 167 Okla. 469, 1934 Okla. LEXIS 573

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMarch 13, 1934

Docket24166

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1934 OK 156 (Fair v. Burtschi) 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

Fair v. Burtschi, 1934 OK 156, 30 P.2d 673, 167 Okla. 469, 1934 Okla. LEXIS 573 (Okla. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action was commenced in the district court of Oklahoma county on the 10th day of September, 1932, and on the 23rd day of September thereafter, George W. Swisher was appointed receiver of the property involved in the action. An application to discharge receiver was denied, and from this order an appeal is taken to tnis court. The appeal was filed herein October 18, 1932, and on the 5th day of December, 1932, the plaintiffs in error filed their brief. No brief has been filed by the defendant in error, and, under the rule many times announced by this court, 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, and the cause is therefore reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order appointing receiver in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error.

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

PER CURIAM.

This action was commenced in the district court of Oklahoma county on the 10th day of September, 1932, and on the 23rd day of September thereafter, George W. Swisher was appointed receiver of the property involved in the action. An application to discharge receiver was denied, and from this order an appeal is taken to tnis court. The appeal was filed herein October 18, 1932, and on the 5th day of December, 1932, the plaintiffs in error filed their brief. No brief has been filed by the defendant in error, and, under the rule many times announced by this court, 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, and the cause is therefore reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order appointing receiver in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1934 OK 156, 30 P.2d 673, 167 Okla. 469, 1934 Okla. LEXIS 573, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fair-v-burtschi-okla-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack