Skelly v. Langley

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Skelly v. Langley

1943 OK 196, 141 P.2d 95, 193 Okla. 129, 1943 Okla. LEXIS 330

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 18, 1943

DocketNo. 30676.

StatusPublished

This text of 1943 OK 196 (Skelly v. Langley) 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

Skelly v. Langley, 1943 OK 196, 141 P.2d 95, 193 Okla. 129, 1943 Okla. LEXIS 330 (Okla. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment for the defendants, and on June 24, 1942, filed her brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants in error have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Osborne v. Osborne, 163 Okla. 273, 21 P. 2d 1056, it is not the duty of this court to search the record to find some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause may be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff.

CORN, C. J., GIBSON, V. C. J., and OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, HURST, and DAVISON, JJ., concur. RILEY and ARNOLD, JJ., absent.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff has appealed from a judgment for the defendants, and on June 24, 1942, filed her brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants in error have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Osborne v. Osborne, 163 Okla. 273, 21 P. 2d 1056, it is not the duty of this court to search the record to find some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but the cause may be reversed and remanded, with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to enter judgment in favor of plaintiff.

CORN, C. J., GIBSON, V. C. J., and OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, HURST, and DAVISON, JJ., concur. RILEY and ARNOLD, JJ., absent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1943 OK 196, 141 P.2d 95, 193 Okla. 129, 1943 Okla. LEXIS 330, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/skelly-v-langley-okla-1943.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack