Opinion
No. 29192.
March 5, 1940.
(Syllabus.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Review — Reversal where defendant in error fails to file brief.
Where plaintiff in error has served and filed its brief in compliance 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, 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.
Appeal from District Court, Oklahoma County; George H. Giddings, Judge.
Action for an accounting by the Hawk Auto Supply Company against N.M. Douglas. From a judgment for the defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Randall Pitman, of Shawnee, for plaintiff in error.
Hal Johnson, of Oklahoma City, for defendant in error.
The trial court entered a judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff seeks a reversal of such judgment. On August 15, 1939, a brief was filed on behalf of the plaintiff in error and the authorities cited therein reasonably tend to support the allegations of error. No brief has been filed by the defendant in error and no excuse offered for such failure. As stated in Osborne v. Osborne, 163 Okla. 273, 21 P.2d 1056, it is not the duty of this court to search the record to find some theory upon which to sustain the action of the trial court, but in such instance the cause will be reversed and remanded, with directions.
The cause is reversed and remanded, with directions to vacate the order and judgment in favor of the defendant and to reinstate the cause and grant a new trial.
BAYLESS, C. J., WELCH, V. C. J., and RILEY, CORN, and HURST, JJ., concur.