Stocker v. Lawrence

1923 OK 715, 220 P. 635, 94 Okla. 45, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 448
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided September 25, 1923·No. 11892·Published

Opinion

Opinion by

STEPHENSON, C.

The plaintiff commenced his action in the district court of Haskell county against the defendant for the possession of certain real estate, or in lieu thereof, a money judgment. In the trial of the cause judgment went for the plaintiff, and the 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. The plaintiff in error has filed brief containing argument and authorities that reasonably tends to support errors assigned for *46 reversal If the defendant in error fails to file brief as required by the rules of this court, the record will not be examined for some'theory to support the judgment of the trial court, but will be reversed and remanded. C., R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver, 67 Okla. 293, 171 Pac. 34. 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

Stocker v. Lawrence, 1923 OK 715, 220 P. 635, 94 Okla. 45, 1923 Okla. LEXIS 448 (Okla. 1923).

1923 OK 715 (Stocker v. Lawrence) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver
1918 OK 71 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1918)