TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Speckman v. Oklahoma Salvage & Supply Co.

Speckman & Osenbaugh v. Oklahoma Salvage & Supply Co.

Speckman v. Okla. Salvage & Supply Co., 1927 OK 63, 254 P. 716
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Oklahoma · State Highest Courts
Decided
March 15, 1927
Docket
No. 17461
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
254 P. 7161927 OK 63122 Okla. 2601927 Okla. LEXIS 180

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the judgment of the superior court of Ok-mulgee county. The plaintiff in error, in due time, filed its brief in compliance with the rules of this court, but the defendant in error has wholly failed to file any bri'ef, pleadings, or other instrument in said cause on appeal, and has offered no excuse for its failure to do so.

In the case of City National Bank v. Coatney, 122 Okla. 233 253 Pac. 481 . in an opinion by this court of date February 22, 1927. it is held that:

“Under this condition of the ease this court is not required to search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment of the trial court may be sustained, but may, where plaintiff in error files bri'ef and cites authorities therein which reasonably support and sustain the assignments of error, reverse the judgment of the lower court in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error.” See Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver, 67 Okla. 213 , 171 Pac. 34 ; Lawton National Bank v. Ulrich, 81 Okla. 159 , 197 Pac. 167 .

In this case plaintiff in error prays that this caus'e be reversed, and that judgment be rendered in favor of plaintiff in error and against defendants in error, that it be restored to all rights lost by reason of rendition of said judgment. Upon examination of authorities cited by plaintiff in error in its brief filed in this cause, it is found' that the contentions of the plaintiff in error are reasonably supported thereby, and it is hereby directed by 'this ocuurt that said judgment appealed from be vacated by the trial *261 court, and that it render judgment in favor of the plaintiff in error enjoining the plaintiff in the trial court from interfering with plaintiff in error in its peaceable possession of the property described in said cause of action and that said plaintiff below be denied any right, title, or interest in ana to said property by reason of the chattel mortgage described in plaintiff’s petition in the trial court.

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 5

DepthCaseCited by
City Nat'l Bank v. Coatney, 1927 OK 47, 253 P. 481 89
Silva v. Silva, 1921 OK 75, 197 P. 167 62
Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver, 1918 OK 71, 171 P. 34 60
Lawton Nat. Bank v. Ulrich, 1921 OK 91, 197 P. 165 40
Noe v. Smith, 1917 OK 567, 169 P. 1108 15

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