Hastings v. Morris

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Hastings v. Morris

1923 OK 1151, 221 P. 490, 96 Okla. 249, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 281

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 18, 1923

Docket14729

StatusPublished

This text of 1923 OK 1151 (Hastings v. Morris) 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

Hastings v. Morris, 1923 OK 1151, 221 P. 490, 96 Okla. 249, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 281 (Okla. 1923).

Pincite

Opinion

McNEILL, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of - Cherokee county. There was judgment rendered for the defendant, motion for new trial filed and overruled, and appeal properly perfected in this court. The plaintiff in error has filed his brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and defendant in error has neither filed brief nor offered excuse for failure so to do. The brief of plaintiff in error appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, and under the numerous authorities of tills court, this court is not required to search the record to find a theory upon which the judgment may be sustained, but it may be reversed in accordance with the petition of plaintiff in error.

For the reasons stated, the judgment of the court is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to set aside *250 the judgment heretofore rendered and grant the plaintiff in error a new trial.

JOHNSON, C. J., and NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, and MASON, JJ., concur.

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

McNEILL, J.

This is an appeal from the district court of - Cherokee county. There was judgment rendered for the defendant, motion for new trial filed and overruled, and appeal properly perfected in this court. The plaintiff in error has filed his brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and defendant in error has neither filed brief nor offered excuse for failure so to do. The brief of plaintiff in error appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, and under the numerous authorities of tills court, this court is not required to search the record to find a theory upon which the judgment may be sustained, but it may be reversed in accordance with the petition of plaintiff in error.

For the reasons stated, the judgment of the court is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to set aside *250 the judgment heretofore rendered and grant the plaintiff in error a new trial.

JOHNSON, C. J., and NICHOLSON, COCHRAN, and MASON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1923 OK 1151, 221 P. 490, 96 Okla. 249, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 281, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hastings-v-morris-okla-1923.