Case Name: KING et al. v. PALMER et al.
Court: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Oklahoma
Decision Date: 1916-12-19
Citations: 62 Okla. 299
Docket Number: No. 7711
Parties: KING et al. v. PALMER et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Oklahoma Reports
Volume: 62
Pages: 299–300

Head Matter:
KING et al. v. PALMER et al.
No. 7711
Opinion Filed Dec. 19, 1916.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 30, 1917.
(162 Pac. 821.)
■ Error from District Court, Haskell County; W. H. Brown, Judge.
Action between Rachel King and others and N. W. Palmer and others. There was judgment for tlie latter, and the former brings error.
Reversed and remanded.
G. A. Holley and B. D. Means, for plaintiffs in error.
.A. L. Beckett and J. E. Whitehead, for defendants in error.

Opinion:
Opinion by
HOOKER, C.
Where the plaintiffs in error have briefed their cause, and the defendants in error have filed no brief, nor offered any excuse for a failure so to do, and the extension of time allowed them in which to file brief has expired, and the brief of plaintiffs in error indicates that there are errors in the record, and the authorities therein cited seem to support their contention, the cause will be reversed and remanded for a new trial.
By the Court: It is.so ordered.