TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Southern Fuel Co.

St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Southern Fuel Co.

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Southern Fuel Co., 1916 OK 346, 157 P. 321
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. 6869
Judges
Wilson
Citations
157 P. 3211916 OK 34659 Okla. 221916 Okla. LEXIS 1079
Disposition
Reversed and remanded for new trial.
Syllabus
Appeal and Error — Briefs—Effect of Failure to File — Reversal. Where a cause has been duly submitted and tbe defendant in error has failed to file an answer brief within the time allowed by the rules of this court, and no reason therefor has been given or extension of time granted for good canse, and the brief filed by the plaintiff in error reasonably well sustains the assignments of error set out in the petition in error, the court will not search the record to find some reason why the judgment appealed from should be sustained, but will reverse and remand the case for’ a new trial. (Syllabus by Wilson, C.)
Summary
Error from District Court, Oklahoma. County ; W. R. Taylor, Judge. Action by the Southern Fuel Company against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant 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 — Wilson

Opinion by WILSON. C.

This case comes to this court on appeal from the district court of Oklahoma county and was filed on October 1.1914. Plaintiff in error’s brief was duly served and filed on December 18, 1915. Although the cause has been duly submitted by order of the court, defendant in error lias failed to file its answer brief within the time allowed by the rules of the court, and no reason has been given for such failure.

We have examined plaintiff in error's brief, and it reasonably well sustains the assignments of error set out in its petition in error, and we, therefore, without searching the record to find some reason why the judgment appealed from should be sustained, recommend that it be reversed and remanded to the distript court of Oklahoma county, with directions that a new trial be granted.

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