City of Tulsa v. Cockrell

• Decision Date: 12 June 1945
• Docket Number: Case Number: 31473
• Citation: City of Tulsa v. Cockrell, 159 P.2d 711, 195 Okla. 518, 1945 OK 191 (Okla. 1945)
• Parties: CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL
• Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court

1945 OK 191

159 P.2d 711

195 Okla. 518

CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL

Case Number: 31473

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

Decided: June 12, 1945

Syllabus

¶0 APPEAL AND ERROR--Failure of defendant in error to file brief - Reversal.

Where plaintiff in error has served and filed brief, but the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for his 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.

Appeal from District Court, Tulsa County; Prentiss E. Rowe, Judge.

Action by L. L. Cockrell against the City of Tulsa, to recover on a claim. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

E. M. Gallaher, L. A. Justus, Philip J. Kramer, and C. Lawrence Elder, all of Tulsa, for plaintiff in error.

Remington Rogers, of Tulsa, for defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

¶1 Plaintiff in error has appealed from a judgment entered against it in the trial court, and on August 11, 1943, filed its brief. The authorities therein cited reasonably sustain the allegations of error. The defendant in error has filed no brief and has offered no excuse for such failure. Under such circumstances, as stated in Gooldy v. Hines, 186 Okla. 583, 99 P.2d 498, it is not the duty of this court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial...