
    PECK v. HUGHEY et al.
    No. 5896
    Opinion Filed Dec. 19, 1916.
    (161 Pac. 1057.)
    (Syllabus by the Court.)
    Appeal and Error — Briefs—Reversal for Failure to File.
    Where plaintiff in error has served and fiied his brief in compliance with the rules of this court, and defendant in error has neither filed a brief nor offered any excuse for his failure to do so, and where the brief filed appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, the Supreme Court may reverse the ease in accordance with the prayer of the petition.
    Error from District Court, Alfalfa County; James B. Cullison Judge.
    Action between Willis H. Peek and D. A. Hughey and another. There was a judgment for the latter, and the former brings error.
    Reversed and remanded.
    Titus & Carpenter, for plaintiff in error.
    Beeman & Kirkendall, for defendants in error.
   HARDY, J.

Plaintiff in error filed his brief herein February 11, 1916, and duly served same upon defendants in error, since which time defendants in error have neither filed a brief nor offered an excuse for such failure; and under the repeated decisions of this court, we are not required to search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment of the court below may be sustained, but may, where plaintiff in error’s brief appears reasonably to sustain the assignments of error, reverse the case in accordance with the prayer of the petition.

It appearing that the assignments of error relied upon are reasonably sustained by the brief filed, the judgment is reversed, and the cause remanded.

All the Justices concur.  