W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Clark

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Clark

1926 OK 1004, 251 P. 607, 120 Okla. 301, 1926 Okla. LEXIS 461

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedDecember 14, 1926

Docket15713

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 1926 OK 1004 (W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Clark) 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

W. T. Rawleigh Co. v. Clark, 1926 OK 1004, 251 P. 607, 120 Okla. 301, 1926 Okla. LEXIS 461 (Okla. 1926).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

DICKSON, O.

This case was tried in the district court of Jackson county on July 12, 1922, resulting in a judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff perfected its appeal to this court by filing its petition in error with case-made attached thereto on April 5, 1924. On January 3. 1925, the plaintiff in error filed its brief. On March 9, 1925, a stipulation was filed in said cause, to the effect that this case be continued pending the final decision in this court of T. J. Sparkman v. W. T. Rawleigh Co. (14284). Said cause was finally disposed of on April 13, 1926, 117 Okla. 235, 245 Pac. 828.

On July 20, 1926, the defendants in error were, by the order of this court, directed to file tlielr brief on or before September 15, *302 1926. This order has not been complied with and no excuse is offered or has been given therefor.

We have examined the errors assigned in the brief of the plaintiff in error and the abstract of the record upon which they are predicated and the grounds for reversal urged appear to be well taken.

In these circumstances we are not required to search the records for reasons why the judgment should be upheld or for authorities in support of the judgment appealed from. Under the authority of Miles v. Bird, 41 Okla. 428, 138 Pac. 789, and Walker v. Robinson, 66 Okla. 56, 166 Pac. 1042, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the district court of Jackson county for a new trial.

By the Court: It is so>ordered.

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

Opinion by

DICKSON, O.

This case was tried in the district court of Jackson county on July 12, 1922, resulting in a judgment for the defendant. The plaintiff perfected its appeal to this court by filing its petition in error with case-made attached thereto on April 5, 1924. On January 3. 1925, the plaintiff in error filed its brief. On March 9, 1925, a stipulation was filed in said cause, to the effect that this case be continued pending the final decision in this court of T. J. Sparkman v. W. T. Rawleigh Co. (14284). Said cause was finally disposed of on April 13, 1926, 117 Okla. 235, 245 Pac. 828.

On July 20, 1926, the defendants in error were, by the order of this court, directed to file tlielr brief on or before September 15, *302 1926. This order has not been complied with and no excuse is offered or has been given therefor.

We have examined the errors assigned in the brief of the plaintiff in error and the abstract of the record upon which they are predicated and the grounds for reversal urged appear to be well taken.

In these circumstances we are not required to search the records for reasons why the judgment should be upheld or for authorities in support of the judgment appealed from. Under the authority of Miles v. Bird, 41 Okla. 428, 138 Pac. 789, and Walker v. Robinson, 66 Okla. 56, 166 Pac. 1042, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the district court of Jackson county for a new trial.

By the Court: It is so>ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1926 OK 1004, 251 P. 607, 120 Okla. 301, 1926 Okla. LEXIS 461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/w-t-rawleigh-co-v-clark-okla-1926.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack