Fore v. Fore

1950 OK 121, 218 P.2d 366, 203 Okla. 75, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 449
CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma
DecidedMay 9, 1950
Docket33476
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 1950 OK 121 (Fore v. Fore) 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
Fore v. Fore, 1950 OK 121, 218 P.2d 366, 203 Okla. 75, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 449 (Okla. 1950).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in error has appealed from a judgment entered against him in the trial court and on February 24, 1948, he filed his brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendant in error has filed no brief and has offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances as stated in Gooldy v. Hines, 186 Okla. 583, 99 P. 2d 498, 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, but the cause will be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to va *76 cate the judgment entered for the plaintiff below and enter judgment for the defendant below.

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

Related

Jenkins v. Thompson
1952 OK 411 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1952)
City of Atoka v. McNeil
1952 OK 389 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1952)
Viersen v. Stanfill
1952 OK 109 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1952)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
1950 OK 121, 218 P.2d 366, 203 Okla. 75, 1950 Okla. LEXIS 449, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fore-v-fore-okla-1950.