Case Name: CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1945-06-12
Citations: 195 Okla. 518
Docket Number: No. 31473
Parties: CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL.
Judges: GIBSON, C.J., HURST, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 195
Pages: 518–518

Head Matter:
CITY OF TULSA v. COCKRELL.
No. 31473.
June 12, 1945.
159 P. 2d 711.
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.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
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 court, but the cause may be reversed and remanded, with directions.
The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the judgment entered for the defendant in error and to enter judgment for the plaintiff in error.
GIBSON, C.J., HURST, V.C.J., and RILEY, OSBORN, BAYLESS, WELCH, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.