
    [No. 18238.
    Department Two.
    March 13, 1894.]
    J. A. RICHTER, Roadmaster, etc., Respondent, v. THE FRESNO CANAL AND IRRIGATION CO., Defendant, FRESNO MILLING CO., Intervenor, Appellant.
    Appeal—Insufficiency of Evidence—Failure of Respondent to Argue Case—Presumption. —Where material findings in a case appealed to the supreme court are attacked by the appellant on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support them, and the respondent has filed no brief and has not argued the case orally, the court will assume, without looking into the record, that the point urged by the appellant that the evidence is insufficient to justify the findings attacked is well taken.
    Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County and from an order denying a new trial.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    
      T. P. Ryan, for Appellant.
    
      District Attorney Firman Church, for Respondent.
   Fitzgerald, J.—

Action to abate an alleged public

nuisance. Plaintiff had judgment, and the Fresno Mining Company, intervenor, appeals from the judgment and the order denying its motion for a new trial.

It appears that certain material findings in this case are attacked by the specifications on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to support them.

But as the respondent herein has not seen fit to file a brief, or to argue the case orally, we do not feel called upon to perform the duty of counsel by hunting through the record for the purpose of discovering evidence to , support the findings, which it was his duty, if it existed, to point out to the court.

Under such circumstances this court will assume, without looking into the record, that the point urged by appellant that the evidence is insufficient to justify the findings attacked, is well taken.

Judgment and order reversed.

McFarland, J., and De Haven, J., concurred.  