Hatfield v. Gott

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Hatfield v. Gott

1936 OK 116, 54 P.2d 346, 175 Okla. 646, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 75

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedFebruary 4, 1936

DocketNo. 26037.

StatusPublished

This text of 1936 OK 116 (Hatfield v. Gott) 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

Hatfield v. Gott, 1936 OK 116, 54 P.2d 346, 175 Okla. 646, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 75 (Okla. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On the 28th day of November, 1934, the petition in error was filed and on the 27th day of February, 1935, the plaintiff in error filed his brief. No brief has been filed for the defendant in error nor has any excuse been offered for such failure. Under such circumstances, it is not the duty of the court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the judgment, but where the allegations of error are reasonably supported in the brief of plaintiff in error, the court may reverse the cause in accordance with the prayer of the plaintiff in error. ^

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment entered and enter judgment for defendant.

McNEILL, C. J., and RILEY, BUSBY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JX, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

On the 28th day of November, 1934, the petition in error was filed and on the 27th day of February, 1935, the plaintiff in error filed his brief. No brief has been filed for the defendant in error nor has any excuse been offered for such failure. Under such circumstances, it is not the duty of the court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the judgment, but where the allegations of error are reasonably supported in the brief of plaintiff in error, the court may reverse the cause in accordance with the prayer of the plaintiff in error. ^

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment entered and enter judgment for defendant.

McNEILL, C. J., and RILEY, BUSBY, PHELPS, and GIBSON, JX, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1936 OK 116, 54 P.2d 346, 175 Okla. 646, 1936 Okla. LEXIS 75, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hatfield-v-gott-okla-1936.