Tongret v. Carlin
Tongret et at. v. Carlin
Headnotes
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Hadley, J.
From the appellants’ brief it is impossible to ascertain any question involved in this appeal. Appellants assign as the only error the overruling of their motion for a new trial. ’ That motion, neither in terms nor substance, is set out in the brief. There is no suggestion in the brief of a single ground of the motion. There is no recital of the evidence in narrative, or any other form. In short, appellants, in their brief, have made no attempt to comply with the fifth subdivision of rule twenty-two, and for this reason we are constrained to hold, following other previous decisions of the court, that no question is presented for our consideration. Henderson v. Henderson (1905), post, 666, and cases cited.
Judgment affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 15 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.