Thompson v. Sing

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Thompson v. Sing

1924 OK 683, 228 P. 963, 102 Okla. 174, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 161

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedSeptember 9, 1924

Docket12484

StatusPublished

This text of 1924 OK 683 (Thompson v. Sing) 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

Thompson v. Sing, 1924 OK 683, 228 P. 963, 102 Okla. 174, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 161 (Okla. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

GORDON, J.

This is an appeal from the county court of Oklahoma county. In the trial court defendant recovered judgment against the plaintiff, and plaintiff brings error.

The record was filed in this court July 23, 1921, and the brief of plaintiff in error was served and filed on the first day of August, 1923. Defendant in error has filed no brief and has offered no .excuse for his failure so to do. Under these circumstances this court will not search the record to find a theory upon which the judgment of the trial court may be sustained, but will, where the authorities cited in the brief filed appear reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, reverse the cause in accordance with the prayer of the petition in .error.

An examination of the record and the brief on file indicates that the authorities cited reasonably sustain some of the assignments of error, and in accordance with the rule of this court, the judgment of the trial court *175 is reversed and tliis cause remanded for further proceedings herewith.

JOHNSON, O. J., and NICHOLSON, BRANSON, HARRISON, MASON, and WARREN, JJ., concur.

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

GORDON, J.

This is an appeal from the county court of Oklahoma county. In the trial court defendant recovered judgment against the plaintiff, and plaintiff brings error.

The record was filed in this court July 23, 1921, and the brief of plaintiff in error was served and filed on the first day of August, 1923. Defendant in error has filed no brief and has offered no .excuse for his failure so to do. Under these circumstances this court will not search the record to find a theory upon which the judgment of the trial court may be sustained, but will, where the authorities cited in the brief filed appear reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, reverse the cause in accordance with the prayer of the petition in .error.

An examination of the record and the brief on file indicates that the authorities cited reasonably sustain some of the assignments of error, and in accordance with the rule of this court, the judgment of the trial court *175 is reversed and tliis cause remanded for further proceedings herewith.

JOHNSON, O. J., and NICHOLSON, BRANSON, HARRISON, MASON, and WARREN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1924 OK 683, 228 P. 963, 102 Okla. 174, 1924 Okla. LEXIS 161, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thompson-v-sing-okla-1924.