Christie v. Slinginger
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.
Spencer, C. J.
— This action was to have a judgment can-celled and vacated as being fraudulent. The sole question assigned as error, is the overruling- of appellants’ demurrer for insufficient facts, to the appellee’s complaint.
There is no question presented; the appellants by their brief have wholly ignored Rule 22 of this court; it fails to set out the complaint or the substance thereof; it contains no statement of “Propositions or Points” and authorities *659 relied on. Such, disregard of rules precludes consideration of the question. Judgment affirmed.
Note. — Reported in 110 N. E. 61 . See, also, 3 C. J. 128T, 1300; 2 Oyc. 1014.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 3 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.