Board of Commissioners v. Ryan

Indiana Supreme Court

Board of Commissioners v. Ryan

110 N.E. 58, 183 Ind. 664, 1915 Ind. LEXIS 118

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 4, 1915

DocketNo. 22,796

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 110 N.E. 58 (Board of Commissioners v. Ryan) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Board of Commissioners v. Ryan, 110 N.E. 58, 183 Ind. 664, 1915 Ind. LEXIS 118 (Ind. 1915).

Pincite

Opinion

Spencer, C. J.

— This is an appeal from a judgment of the Marion Superior Court sustaining appellee’s claim against Marion County for services rendered in examining a series of abstracts of title to real estate which was offered as security for certain loans from the common and congressional school funds.

Appellant’s assignment of errors contains nine alleged grounds for a reversal of the judgment herein and at least three of said grounds are relied on in appellant’s brief. Under the heading of “Points and Authorities”, said brief contains a series of abstract statements of law, supported by authorities, which have reference to’ certain limitations on the powers of boards of county commissioners and to the proper method of providing their acts. No attempt is made, however, to apply these propositions to any particular as[665]*665signment of error and in this respect appellant’s brief wholly fails to comply with clause 5, Rule 22, of the rules of this court. Weidenhammer v. State (1914), 181 Ind. 349, 103 N. E. 413, 104 N. E. 577, and cases cited. No question, therefore, is properly presented for our consideration and the judgment of the trial court must he and is, affirmed.

Note. — Reported In 110 N. E. 58. See, also, 3 O. J. 1409; 2 Cyc. 1014.

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

Spencer, C. J.

— This is an appeal from a judgment of the Marion Superior Court sustaining appellee’s claim against Marion County for services rendered in examining a series of abstracts of title to real estate which was offered as security for certain loans from the common and congressional school funds.

Appellant’s assignment of errors contains nine alleged grounds for a reversal of the judgment herein and at least three of said grounds are relied on in appellant’s brief. Under the heading of “Points and Authorities”, said brief contains a series of abstract statements of law, supported by authorities, which have reference to’ certain limitations on the powers of boards of county commissioners and to the proper method of providing their acts. No attempt is made, however, to apply these propositions to any particular as[665]*665signment of error and in this respect appellant’s brief wholly fails to comply with clause 5, Rule 22, of the rules of this court. Weidenhammer v. State (1914), 181 Ind. 349, 103 N. E. 413, 104 N. E. 577, and cases cited. No question, therefore, is properly presented for our consideration and the judgment of the trial court must he and is, affirmed.

Note. — Reported In 110 N. E. 58. See, also, 3 O. J. 1409; 2 Cyc. 1014.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

110 N.E. 58, 183 Ind. 664, 1915 Ind. LEXIS 118, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/board-of-commissioners-v-ryan-ind-1915.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack