Alabam Freight Lines v. Chateau

106 P.2d 332, 56 Ariz. 148, 1940 Ariz. LEXIS 166
Arizona Supreme Court·Decided October 14, 1940·No. Civil No. 4239.·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

The appellee herein filed a motion to dismiss the appeal. Such motion was granted but thereafter, upon a showing which we thought justified it, the order of dismissal was vacated and the case reinstated.

The appellant has filed its brief and made a number of assignments of error, to which appellee has made no answer. We have held, when appellee fails to answer appellant's assignments of error, we will treat such failure as tantamount to a confession of error and reverse the case. The cases holding thus are: Skelsey v. Kuhn, 23 Ariz. 367, 203 P. 1082; Hatch v.Leighton, 24 Ariz. 300, 209 P. 300; Tarbell v. Rivera,31 Ariz. 214, 251 P. 553. This is especially so if any debatable question is raised by an appellant. Navarro v. State,32 Ariz. 119, 256 P. 114; Adkins v. Adkins, 39 Ariz. 530,8 P.2d 248; Welch v. United Mutual Benefit Assn., 48 Ariz. 173,60 P.2d 931.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

LOCKWOOD and McALISTER JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Alabam Freight Lines v. Chateau, 106 P.2d 332, 56 Ariz. 148, 1940 Ariz. LEXIS 166 (Ark. 1940).

106 P.2d 332 (Alabam Freight Lines v. Chateau) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Reeb v. Interchange Resources, Inc.
473 P.2d 818 (Court of Appeals of Arizona, 1970)