Gypsy Oil Co. v. Craig

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Gypsy Oil Co. v. Craig

1923 OK 683, 218 P. 824, 92 Okla. 223, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 840

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 25, 1923

Docket11926

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK 683 (Gypsy Oil Co. v. Craig) 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

Gypsy Oil Co. v. Craig, 1923 OK 683, 218 P. 824, 92 Okla. 223, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 840 (Okla. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

STEPHENSON, C.

The plaintiff commenced his action in the county court of Pawnee county against the defendant for damages. In the trial of the cause judgment went for the plaintiff, and defendant has brought error to this court for review. This cause was regularly assigned and submitted, with notice to the attorneys for the respective parties to prepare, serve, and file briefs. The plaintiff in error has prepared and served brief, containing argument and authorities reasonably tending to support the errors assigned for reversal. The defendant in error has failed to prepare and serve brief in this cause as is required by Hie rules of this court. If the brief of the plaintiff in error contains argument and authorities reasonably tending to support the errors assigned for reversal, and the defendant fails to prepare and serve brief, the record will not be examined for some theory to support the judgment of the trial court, but will be reversed and remanded. Therefore, it is recommended that this cause be reversed and remanded.

■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

STEPHENSON, C.

The plaintiff commenced his action in the county court of Pawnee county against the defendant for damages. In the trial of the cause judgment went for the plaintiff, and defendant has brought error to this court for review. This cause was regularly assigned and submitted, with notice to the attorneys for the respective parties to prepare, serve, and file briefs. The plaintiff in error has prepared and served brief, containing argument and authorities reasonably tending to support the errors assigned for reversal. The defendant in error has failed to prepare and serve brief in this cause as is required by Hie rules of this court. If the brief of the plaintiff in error contains argument and authorities reasonably tending to support the errors assigned for reversal, and the defendant fails to prepare and serve brief, the record will not be examined for some theory to support the judgment of the trial court, but will be reversed and remanded. Therefore, it is recommended that this cause be reversed and remanded.

■By the Court: It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK 683, 218 P. 824, 92 Okla. 223, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gypsy-oil-co-v-craig-okla-1923.