
    TURMAN et al. v. INGRAM.
    No. 4538.
    Opinion Filed July 13, 1915.
    (150 Pac. 684.)
    APPEAL AND ERROR — Failure to File Brief — Reversal. Where defendant in error files no brief, if upon examination of brief of plaintiffs in error and the record plaintiffs in error’s contention is reasonably supported, this court will not search for a theory upon which to affirm the judgment.
    (Syllabus by Brett, C.)
    
      
      Error from District Court, Seminole County; Tom D. McKeown, Judge.
    
    Action by Mark Ingram against Thomas Turman and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants bring error.
    Reversed and remanded.
    
      Don W. Willmott, for plaintiffs in error.
   Opinion by

BRETT, C.

This cause was filed in this court November 12, 1912, and on May 21, 1915, plaintiffs in error filed a very elaborate brief. The defendant in error has filed no brief, offered no excuse for not doing so, and has asked for no extension of time in which to file brief. We have examined the brief of plaintiffs ifi error and find the contention of plaintiffs in error reasonably supported by their brief. And it is the settled policy of this court, where such is the case, not to search for a theory upon which the judgment can be affirmed; but, if the plaintiff in error’s brief reasonably sustains his contention, to reverse the judgment.

We therefore recommend that the judgment be reversed, and the cause remanded.

By the Court: It is so ordered.  