VIERSEN v. STANFILL

VIERSEN v. STANFILL
1952 OK 109
242 P.2d 162
206 Okla 184
Case Number: 35152
Decided: 03/18/1952
Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Syllabus

¶0 Where plaintiffs in error have served and filed brief, but the defendants in error have neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for their failure to do so, the 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 the authorities cited in the brief filed appear reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, reverse the cause, with directions.

Carland Smith, Okmulgee, for plaintiffs in error.

Dale B. Sutton, Chandler, for defendants in error.

DAVISON, J.

¶1 Plaintiffs in error have appealed from a judgment against them in the trial court and on September 28, 1951, filed their brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendants in error have filed no brief and have offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances as stated in Fore v. Fore, 203 Okl. 75, 218 P.2d 366, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court but the cause will be reversed and remanded with directions.

¶2 The cause is reversed and remanded with directions to the trial court to vacate the judgment entered for D. A. Stanfill and Martha E. Stanfill for attorney's fee.

¶3 HALLEY, V. C. J., and WELCH, CORN, GIBSON, JOHNSON, O'NEAL, and BINGAMAN, JJ., concur.