What is the obligation of an appellant to address section 1624.5 of the California Civil Code in their reply brief?

Despite the trial court's decision that Civil Code section 1624.5 barred their breach of contract cause of action, appellants did not address the statute in their opening brief. As appellants, it was their obligation to establish that the trial court was wrong. (Paterno v. State of California (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th 68, 102.) Although appellants address Civil Code section 1624.5 in their reply brief, this effort "comes too late." (Paterno, at p. 102.) "'Obvious considerations of fairness in argument demand that the appellant present all of his points in the opening brief. . . . Hence the rule is that points raised in the reply brief for the first time will not be considered, unless good reason is shown for failure to present them before. [Citations.]' [Citation.]" (Neighbours v. Buzz Oates Enterprises (1990) 217 Cal.App.3d 325, 335, fn. 8.)