Begay v. Begay

Navajo Nation Ct. App.

Begay v. Begay

4 Navajo Rptr. 71

CourtNavajo Nation Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 27, 1983

DocketNo. A-CV-32-81

StatusPublished

This text of 4 Navajo Rptr. 71 (Begay v. Begay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Navajo Nation Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Begay v. Begay, 4 Navajo Rptr. 71 (navajoctapp 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

The documents on file in this appeal hardly fit the requirement of 7 NTC Sec. 801(a) that a request for permission to appeal be a document "stating the reasons why he wants to appeal."

Courts of appeal are not required to search the district court record for errors which should be raised by counsel in well-prepared briefs. Here there is a general statement in a "Brief on Appeal" that it would be an abuse of discretion not to grant the motion for reconsideration (apparently made in the trial court). There is a bare assertion that the appellant was inadequately represented by counsel at trial, but there is no argument on that point and there is nothing on the face of the appeal to satisfy the Chief Justice there is probable cause for believing so.

This case file is an example of the kind of appeal which does not satisfy the probable cause requirements of 7 NTC Sec. 801.

The appeal is DISMISSED.

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

The documents on file in this appeal hardly fit the requirement of 7 NTC Sec. 801(a) that a request for permission to appeal be a document "stating the reasons why he wants to appeal."

Courts of appeal are not required to search the district court record for errors which should be raised by counsel in well-prepared briefs. Here there is a general statement in a "Brief on Appeal" that it would be an abuse of discretion not to grant the motion for reconsideration (apparently made in the trial court). There is a bare assertion that the appellant was inadequately represented by counsel at trial, but there is no argument on that point and there is nothing on the face of the appeal to satisfy the Chief Justice there is probable cause for believing so.

This case file is an example of the kind of appeal which does not satisfy the probable cause requirements of 7 NTC Sec. 801.

The appeal is DISMISSED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 Navajo Rptr. 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/begay-v-begay-navajoctapp-1983.