First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Walker

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Walker

1933 OK 18, 18 P.2d 513, 161 Okla. 284, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 455

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedJanuary 24, 1933

Docket22423

StatusPublished

This text of 1933 OK 18 (First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. v. Walker) 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 & Trust Co. v. Walker, 1933 OK 18, 18 P.2d 513, 161 Okla. 284, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 455 (Okla. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On June 5, 1931, plaintiffs in error, defendants below, filed their petition in error appealing from a judgment-rendered December 12, 1930, in. favor of plaintiff, wherein the trial court, entered judgment for $7,108.30, with interest and costs. •

September 23; 1931, plaintiffs in error filed brief, but defendant in error has failed to file brief or to excuse such failure. The examination of the authorities cited in the brief of plaintiffs in error reasonably tends to support the assignments of error. Under the rules of this court, this being the case, this! court is not required to search the record to find some theory to sustain the judgment of the trial court. City National Bank v. Coatney, 122 Okla. 233, 253 P. 481; Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver, 67 Okla. 293, 171 P. 34. This case is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment of the plaintiff and render judgment for the defendant.

Note.—See under (1) 2 R. C. L. 176; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 360.

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

PER CURIAM.

On June 5, 1931, plaintiffs in error, defendants below, filed their petition in error appealing from a judgment-rendered December 12, 1930, in. favor of plaintiff, wherein the trial court, entered judgment for $7,108.30, with interest and costs. •

September 23; 1931, plaintiffs in error filed brief, but defendant in error has failed to file brief or to excuse such failure. The examination of the authorities cited in the brief of plaintiffs in error reasonably tends to support the assignments of error. Under the rules of this court, this being the case, this! court is not required to search the record to find some theory to sustain the judgment of the trial court. City National Bank v. Coatney, 122 Okla. 233, 253 P. 481; Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver, 67 Okla. 293, 171 P. 34. This case is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment of the plaintiff and render judgment for the defendant.

Note.—See under (1) 2 R. C. L. 176; R. C. L. Perm. Supp. p. 360.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1933 OK 18, 18 P.2d 513, 161 Okla. 284, 1933 Okla. LEXIS 455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/first-nat-bank-trust-co-v-walker-okla-1933.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack