PROHIBITION — Prima Facie Showing — No Response of Respondent — Drains and Drainage Proceedings. — Where petitioner alleges special judge is attempting to exercise jurisdiction to hear petition to modify and reopen a judgment approving a final report in a drainage matter, which petition was filed after term, but respondent filed no response, brief or objections of any kind opposing either temporary writ herein, and petition makes out prima facie case, the writ heretofore granted will be made permanent.
ARTERBURN, J.
This is an original action asking for a writ of prohibition out of this court. A temporary writ was issued upon a prima facie showing on October 27, 1955. The petition herein states that the respondent, Special Judge, is attempting to exercise jurisdiction to hear petition (filed after term) to modify and reopen a judgment approving a final report in a drainage matter.
The respondent, Special Judge, and those adverse to the petitioner herein, filed no response, brief, or objections of any kind opposing the granting of either the temporary or permanent writ herein and are in default. It is to be regretted we have not had the benefit of the opposing views, if any, in this matter. This court cannot, however, assume the responsibilities and duties of adverse counsel, and search the record for reasons why the relief sought should not be granted. State ex rel. Toll Rd. Comm. v. St. Joseph S.Ct. etc. (1954), 233 Ind. 47, 116 N.E.2d 514; Walls et al. v. State ex rel. Mallott, Auditor of Lawrence Co. et al. (1895), 140 Ind. 16, 38 N.E. 177.
Upon the prima facie showing originally made, and for the reason the issuance of the permanent writ is unopposed, the writ is made permanent.
Bobbitt, C.J., Achor and Landis, JJ., concur.
Emmert, J., not participating.
NOTE. — Reported in 130 N.E.2d 460.