gno.law

Ferslew v. Andersen

California Court of Appeal · Civ. No. 10780 · 1936-01-23 · Published · 11 Cal. App. 2d 400 · 53 P.2d 768 · 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 362

MAX FERSLEW v. ANTONE ANDERSEN

Area
civil
Panel
Marshall F. McComb (author)

Analysis

No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.

Opinion — McComb

McCOMB, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondent after a trial before a court without a jury.

Appellant has not observed the provision of Rule VIII, section 2, of this court, which requires that the question involved on appeal in a civil action be set forth on the first page of the opening brief without any other matter appearing thereon. (Rule VIII, sec. 2, p. 10, Rules of the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California.)

In the instant case there is a total absence of a compliance with the foregoing rule. This court cannot assume the task of searching the record for the purpose of discovering errors not pointed out by counsel. It is the duty of counsel to comply with Rule VIII, supra, in its entirety.

For the foregoing reasons the appeal is dismissed.

Grail, P. J., and Wood, J., concurred.

Cited by