"Rule 26. The brief shall contain the specifications of errors complained of separately set forth and numbered; the argument and authorities in support of each point relied on, in the same order, with strict observance of rule 7." The plaintiff has not filed an answer brief and has advanced no reason or excuse for failure so to do, and is wholly in default, and this court is not required to search the record for the purpose of discovering some theory upon which the judgment of the lower court may be affirmed, but may consider the brief of the plaintiff in error, and, if the same reasonably sustains the assignments of error, may reverse the judgment of the lower court. Miller v. Huckaby, 87 Okla. 295, 210 P. 1034; Chicago, R.I. P. Ry. Co. v. Kilbourn, 87 Okla. 296, 210 P. 1034; Levy Bros. Furniture Co. v. Hickey, 90 Okla. 30, 215 P. 757; Graham v. Kay, 91 Okla. 37, 215 P. 755; Johnson v. Potts, 87 Okla. 188, 209 P. 734; Security State Bank v. First National Bank, 89 Okla. 179, 213 P. 874. In the case under review, defendant has presented a very exhaustive brief, and with fairness has presented the evidence of plaintiff and defendant, and has cited and compared authorities, and upon careful consideration of all the evidence and authorities set forth in defendant's brief, we find the same reasonably sustain the assignments of error, and the judgment of the court below, for the reasons herein stated, should be reversed, and this cause remanded, with instructions to the district court to grant the defendant a new trial.