
    WALKER et al. v. JACOBS.
    No. 12993
    Opinion Filed Sept. 16, 1924.
    Appeal and Error-Absence of Answer Brief —Reversal.
    Where the plaintiffs in error have duly filed and served brief in compliance with the rule of the Supreme Court, and defendant has neither filed brief nor offered excuse for failure so to do, the Supreme Court will not search the record to find some theory upon which the judgment may be sustained; hut where the brief filed appears reasonably to sustain any assignment of prejudicial error, the judgment will be reversed.
    (Syllabus by Jarman, C.)
    Commissioners’ Opinion, Division No. 2.
    Error from District Court, Hughes County; John L. Coffman, Judge.
    Action by Willie Jacobs against Thomas Walker et al., to cancel oil and gas lease and to recover damages. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant brings error.
    Reversed.
    Crump & Hall, for plaintiffs in error.
    Anglin & Stevenson, for defendant in error.
   Opinion by

JARMAN, C.

This is an appeal from the district court of Hughes county. The plaintiffs in error filed their brief November 24, 1922. No brief has been filed by the defendant in error and no extension of time has been given to file same, and no reason has been assigned by the defendant in error as to why it has not filed brief. The brief of the plaintiffs in error appears to reasonably sustain tbe assignments of error, and under tbe rule of tbis court, tbe rec. rd will not be searched to find some theory upon wbicb tbe judgment of tbe lower court may be sustained.

Tbe judgment of tbe’ lower court is reversed.

By tbe Court: It is so ordered.  