First Nat. Bank of Mayesville v. Price

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

First Nat. Bank of Mayesville v. Price

1916 OK 505, 157 P. 339, 57 Okla. 498, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 547

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 2, 1916

Docket6676

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1916 OK 505 (First Nat. Bank of Mayesville v. Price) 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

First Nat. Bank of Mayesville v. Price, 1916 OK 505, 157 P. 339, 57 Okla. 498, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 547 (Okla. 1916).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

HOOKER, C.

The petition in error with case-made attached was filed in this court on July 25, 1914. The plaintiff in error filed its brief on February 23, 1916, but up to this date the defendant in error has not filed any brief or offered any excuse for such failure. We will therefore apply the rule of this court that, where the brief of the plaintiff in error reasonably appears to support the assignments of error, the court will not search the record to ascertain some possible theory on which the case may be affirmed, but, if the assignments of error appear to be reasonably supported by the record, the case will be reversed. Butler v. McSpadden, 25 Okla. 465, 107 *499 Pac. 170; Dievert, etc., School Board of District No. 70, v. Rainey et al., 41 Okla. 31, 136 Pac. 1086.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed, and the cause remanded to the county court of Garvin county for such further proceedings as may be proper.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

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

Opinion by

HOOKER, C.

The petition in error with case-made attached was filed in this court on July 25, 1914. The plaintiff in error filed its brief on February 23, 1916, but up to this date the defendant in error has not filed any brief or offered any excuse for such failure. We will therefore apply the rule of this court that, where the brief of the plaintiff in error reasonably appears to support the assignments of error, the court will not search the record to ascertain some possible theory on which the case may be affirmed, but, if the assignments of error appear to be reasonably supported by the record, the case will be reversed. Butler v. McSpadden, 25 Okla. 465, 107 *499 Pac. 170; Dievert, etc., School Board of District No. 70, v. Rainey et al., 41 Okla. 31, 136 Pac. 1086.

The judgment appealed from should be reversed, and the cause remanded to the county court of Garvin county for such further proceedings as may be proper.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1916 OK 505, 157 P. 339, 57 Okla. 498, 1916 Okla. LEXIS 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-of-mayesville-v-price-okla-1916.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack