Title: PLANTERS' STATE BANK OF TUSHKA v. WALTON
Citation: 124 Okla. 247, 1927 OK 73, 255 P. 57 7
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: March 22, 1927

PLANTERS' STATE BANK OF TUSHKA v. WALTON Annotate this Case PLANTERS' STATE BANK OF TUSHKA v. WALTON 1927 OK 73 255 P. 577 124 Okla. 247 Case Number: 16978 Decided: 03/22/1927 Supreme Court of Oklahoma PLANTERS' STATE BANK OF TUSHKA v. WALTON. Syllabus ¶0 Appeal and Error--Reversal in Absence of Answer Brief. Where the plaintiff in error has served and filed its brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for his failure to do so, this 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, in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error. Error from County Court, Atoka County; Otis H. Presson, Judge. Action between the Planters State Bank of Tushka, Okla., and R. M. Walton. From the judgment, the former brings error. Reversed and remanded. Gordon Fryer, for plaintiff in error. C. McCasland, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM ¶1 This is an appeal from the judgment of the county court of Atoka county. Plaintiff in error was plaintiff below. The plaintiff in error in due time served and filed its brief in full compliance with the rules of this court, but the defendant in error has wholly failed to file any brief or to otherwise appear in this cause in this court, nor has he offered any excuse for his failure to do so. ¶2 In the case of the City National Bank v. Coatney et al., "Where plaintiff in error has served and filed its brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for his failure to do so, this 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, in accordance with the prayer of the petition in error." Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v. Weaver,