Opinion
No. 33476.
May 9, 1950.
(Syllabus.)
APPEAL AND ERROR — Review — Failure of defendant in error to file brief — Reversal. Where plaintiff in error has 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, Seminole County; Bob Howell, Judge.
Proceeding by Carl Fore to review an order of contempt after decree in divorce. Reversed and remanded, with directions.
Wells Wells, of Seminole, for plaintiff in error.
Charles S. Carl, of Wewoka, for defendant in error.
Plaintiff in error has appealed from a judgment entered against him in the trial court and on February 24, 1948, he filed his 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 the trial court to vacate the judgment entered for the plaintiff below and enter judgment for the defendant below.