Viersen v. Stanfill

1952 OK 109, 242 P.2d 162, 206 Okla. 184, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 540
Supreme Court of Oklahoma·Decided March 18, 1952·No. No. 35152·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

DAVISON, J.

Plaintiffs in error have appealed from a judgment against them in the trial court and on September 28, 1951, filed their 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 Fore v. Fore, 203 Okla. 75, 218 P. 2d 366, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon [185]*185which to sustain the action of the trial crurt, but the cause will be reversed and remanded with directions.

The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment entered for D. A. Stanfill and Martha E. Stanfill for attorney’s fee.

HALLEY, Y. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, GIBSON, JOHNSON, O’NEAL, and BINGAMAN, JJ., concur.

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

Viersen v. Stanfill, 1952 OK 109, 242 P.2d 162, 206 Okla. 184, 1952 Okla. LEXIS 540 (Okla. 1952).

1952 OK 109 (Viersen v. Stanfill) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Mulkey v. State
1970 OK 84 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1970)