Title: JONES v. SABINE OIL & MKTG. CO.
Citation: 100 Okla. 256, 1924 OK 724, 229 P. 22 0
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: September 16, 1924

JONES v. SABINE OIL & MKTG. CO. Annotate this Case JONES v. SABINE OIL & MKTG. CO. 1924 OK 724 229 P. 220 100 Okla. 256 Case Number: 13461 Decided: 09/16/1924 Supreme Court of Oklahoma JONES v. SABINE OIL & MARKETING CO. Syllabus ¶0 Appeal and Error--Failure to File Brief--Reversal Plaintiff in error has duly filed his brief. Defendant has neither filed brief nor offered excuse for failure so to do. The Supreme Court will not search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment may be sustained. Since the brief of plaintiff in error reasonably tends to sustain the assignments of prejudicial error, the judgment will be reversed and the cause remanded for new trial. Commissioners' Opinion, Division No. 2. Error from District Court, Tulsa County; W. B. Williams, Judge. Action by E. C. Jones against Sabine Oil & Marketing Company for broker's commission. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded. Biddison & Campbell, for plaintiff in error. W. D. Abbott, for defendant in error. ESTES, C. ¶1 Plaintiff in error filed his brief herein on the 6th day of February, 1921. No brief has been filed by defendant in error nor has any reason been assigned for failure so to do. Under the well known rule of this court, when the brief of plaintiff in error appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, this court will not search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment may be sustained. ¶2 We have examined the brief of plaintiff in error and find the same reasonably sustains the assignments of prejudicial error. The trial court directed the jury to return a verdict in favor of defendant in error, and against plaintiff in error, plaintiff below, on the theory that there was no evidence in favor of plaintiff on which the cause could be submitted to the jury. As shown by brief of plaintiff in error, the cause should have been submitted to the jury. The judgment of the trial court is therefore reversed and the cause remanded for new trial.