Smith v. Graham Brown Shoe Co.

1937 OK 235, 67 P.2d 448, 179 Okla. 559, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 334
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided April 6, 1937·No. No. 27547.·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an action on account. Judgment was for the plaintiff. Plaintiff introduced as his case certain depositions to prove his account.

The sole issue argued in the defendant’s brief is that the exhibits of depositions constituting the account were never properly identified. No contest was raised as to the payment or otherwise in the trial court. The account was not specifically denied, and it is not urged here that the exhibits are incorrect. No defense is presented. We have held that where a motion to dismiss has been filed which challenges the appeal on the ground that it is without merit and for delay only, the same will be dismissed if an examination of plaintiff in error’s brief shows that there is no contest. The appeal is dismissed, and the judgment of the trial court affirmed.

OSBORN, C. J., and RILEY, WELCH, CORN, and GIBSON, JX, concur.

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

Smith v. Graham Brown Shoe Co., 1937 OK 235, 67 P.2d 448, 179 Okla. 559, 1937 Okla. LEXIS 334 (Okla. 1937).

1937 OK 235 (Smith v. Graham Brown Shoe Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Baker v. Marcus
1951 OK 54 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1951)
Stone v. Oklahoma City Ex Rel. Lane
1944 OK 344 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1944)
Jones v. Bob Cason Motor Co.
1942 OK 326 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1942)
Atkinson v. Shaffer
1940 OK 232 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1940)
Offutt v. Fizz-O Water Co.
1940 OK 249 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1940)