TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Singleton v. Ballew

Singleton v. Ballew, 1916 OK 350, 156 P. 324
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 21, 1916
Docket
No. 6910
Judges
Clay
Citations
156 P. 3241916 OK 35057 Okla. 7871916 Okla. LEXIS 592
Disposition
Reversed and remanded.
Syllabus
APPEAL AND ERROR — Briefs—Failure to File — Reversal. Where the plaintiff in error has perfected an appeal and filed briefs and defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for such failure, the court is not required to search the record to find some theory upon which judgment may be sustained; and where the brief filed appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, the court may reverse the judgment in accordance with the prayer of the plaintiff in error. (Syllabus by Clay, C.)
Summary
Error from County Court, Cherokee County; E. E. McMichael, Judge. Action by John W. Singleton against' M. M. Ballew. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiif brings error.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Clay

Opinion by CLAY, C.

This cause presents error from the county court of Cherokee county, Okla. The plaintiif in error has filed with his petition in error a case-made in compliance with the rules of this court and has served and filed a brief, but the defendant in error has not filed, nor oifered any -excuse for his failure to file, a brief.

In such cases this court is not required to search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment may be sustained; and where the brief filed appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, the court may reverse the judgment in accordance' with the prayer of the petition in error. From an examination of the brief filed, we are of the opinion that the grounds for reversal therein urged should be sustained.

We therefore recommend that the judgment of the trial court be reversed, and the case remanded.

By the Court: It is so ordered.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list