Opinion
No. 31548.
May 29, 1944.
(Syllabus.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Failure of defendant in error to file brief — Reversal.
Where plaintiffs in error have served and filed brief, but the defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for her 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; Albert C. Hunt, Judge.
Proceeding by Helen S. Francis before Board of Adjustment for building permit constituting an exception to the zoning ordinance of Oklahoma City. Permit denied by the board, and from an order of the trial court reversing the order of the board, William J. Cowgill and others appeal. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Chas. H. Garnett, of Oklahoma City, for plaintiff in error.
Ellmore Pinnick, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.
Defendants have appealed from a judgment entered against them in the trial court and on August 30, 1943, filed their 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 will be reversed and remanded with directions.
The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order of the trial court granting the permit.
CORN, C. J., GIBSON, V.C.J., and BAYLESS, HURST, DAVISON, and ARNOLD, JJ., concur.