Title: YELLOW TAXICAB & BAGGAGE CO. v. GARDNER
Citation: 168 Okla. 251, 1934 OK 306, 32 P.2d 894
Docket Number: 
State: Oklahoma
Issuer: Oklahoma Supreme Court
Date: May 15, 1934

YELLOW TAXICAB & BAGGAGE CO. v. GARDNER Annotate this Case YELLOW TAXICAB & BAGGAGE CO. v. GARDNER 1934 OK 306 32 P.2d 894 168 Okla. 251 Case Number: 24069 Decided: 05/15/1934 Supreme Court of Oklahoma YELLOW TAXICAB & BAGGAGE CO. v. GARDNER. Syllabus ¶0 Appeal and Error--Reversal in Absence of Answer Brief. Where plaintiff in error has served and filed its brief incompliance with the rules of court, 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, Oklahoma County; Jesse J. Worten, Judge. Action by Val Gardner against the Yellow Taxicab & Baggage Company for damages for personal injury. From a judgment for the plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions. Dudley, Hyde, Duvall & Dudley, for plaintiff in error. McCaffery & Scanland and H. F. Tripp, for defendant in error. PER CURIAM. ¶1 This action was commenced in the district court of Oklahoma county. A judgment for $ 500 was rendered for the plaintiff, and from this judgment the defendant prosecutes an appeal, and on the 13th day of January, 1934, filed its brief, which reasonably supports the allegations of error complained of. The defendant in error has failed to file a brief, or to offer any excuse for such failure. ¶2 This court has repeatedly held that it is not the duty of the court to search the record for some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but where the defendant in error has failed to brief, this court may reverse and remand the cause, with directions. Moore v. Jefferson, 164 Okla. 270 , 23 P.2d 693; Chapman v. Taylor, 163 Okla. 274, 21 P.2d 1058; Missouri State Life Ins. Co. v. Willis, 164 Okla. 271, 23 P.2d 622 ; Peoria Life Ins. Co. v. Edwards, 163 Okla. 275 , 21 P.2d 1058.