Opinion
No. 19,840.
Filed March 28, 1963.
1. APPEAL — Determination — Failure of Appellee to File Brief. — Appellate Court may give adequate consideration to questions involved in a proposed review of an administrative board notwithstanding the want of briefs from appellees. p. 413.
2. APPEAL — Failure of Appellees to File Brief — Reversal. — Where appellee filed no brief Appellate Court may reverse decision of an administrative board on the basis of error demonstrated in appellant's brief. p. 413.
From the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division.
Appellee, Review Board of Indiana Employment Security Division, found that appellee, Aleen Pennington, did not refuse a suitable offer of re-employment without good cause. Appellant, Wayfair Restaurant, appeals.
Reversed. By the First Division.
William S. McMaster, of Indianapolis, for appellant.
Edwin K. Steers, Attorney General and Keith Campbell, Deputy Attorney General, for appellee, Review Board.
This matter comes before us for a judicial review from a decision of the Review Board of the Indiana Employment Security Division wherein said Board held, in substance, that the appellee, Aleen Pennington, "did not refuse a suitable offer of re-employment without good cause on October 18, 1961."
It is apparent from the record and papers now before us that the appellee, Aleen Pennington, has not seen fit to file a brief in support of the Review Board's award. Counsel for the Review Board has filed and requested us to decide this matter without the benefit of an answer brief on behalf of said Review Board.
The appellees have not favored us with a brief in answer to the brief of appellant; however, this being a proposed review of an administrative board, it seems proper to give adequate 1. consideration to the questions involved notwithstanding the want of assistance from the appellees.
In reviewing and considering the appellant's brief filed herein, together with the record, we are impressed that the 2. appellant has made and demonstrated a very forceful case for reversal.
Upon the record we are forced to the conclusion that the Review Board was in error in its decision hereby reviewed and that the same should be reversed.
Decision reversed.
Carson, Clements, and Ryan, JJ., concur.
NOTE. — Reported in 188 N.E.2d 921.