Ruark v. Fithen

RUARK v. FITHEN Et Al.

Ruark v. Fithen, 1916 OK 554, 157 P. 898

Court: Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided: May 16, 1916
Docket: No. 7543
Judges: Hooker
Citations: 157 P. 8981916 OK 55457 Okla. 7461916 Okla. LEXIS 586
Disposition: Reversed.

Cited by 0

Syllabus

APPEAL AND ERROR — Briefs—Failure to File — Reversal. Where . plaintiff in error has completed his record and filed it in this court and has served and filed a brief in compliance with the rules of this court', and the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for such failure, this court is not required to search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment may be affirmed; 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 or the rights of the parties. (Syllabus by Hooker, O.)

Summary

Error from County Court, Woodward County; Clyde H. Wyand, Judge. Action by Frank Fithen and another against George Ruark. From the judgment, Ruark 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 — Hooker

Opinion by HOOKER, C.

The petition in error with the case-made attached was filed in this court on June 15, 1915. The plaintiff in error duly filed his brief, but the defendants in error have not filed any brief, nor offered any excuse for their failure so to do. We will therefore apply the rule of this court, that where the brief of the plaintiff in error reasonably appears to support the assignments of error this court will not search the record to ascertain some possible theory upon which the case may be affirmed, but if the assignments of error appear to be reasonably, supported by the record, the case will be reversed. See First National Bank of Maysville v. J. H. Price, ante, p. 498, 157 Pac. 339 .

The judgment appealed from is reversed and this cause is remanded to the county court of Woodward county, for a new trial.

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 1

Depth	Case	Cited by
	First Nat. Bank of Mayesville v. Price, 1916 OK 505, 157 P. 339	1

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list