Bonnel v. Shirley
31 N.E. 64, 131 Ind. 362, 1892 Ind. LEXIS 192
Opinion
The brief filed by counsel for the appellant contains nothing whatever by way of argument, or citation of authority. Nor is there even a suggestion of any reason, or ground, for holding the action of the court below erroneous.
We find nothing in it but a bare assertion of error. Such a brief presents no question for our consideration. Harrison v. Hedges, 60 Ind. 266; Bray v. Franklin Life Ins. Co., 68 Ind. 6; Landwerlen v. Wheeler, 106 Ind. 523, and many other cases.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Bonnel v. Shirley, 31 N.E. 64, 131 Ind. 362, 1892 Ind. LEXIS 192 (Ind. 1892).
31 N.E. 64 (Bonnel v. Shirley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Meno v. State
114 N.E. 689 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1917)
Eckman v. Funderburg
108 N.E. 577 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1915)
Sullivan v. Hoopengarner
96 N.E. 620 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1911)
Guy v. Blue
45 N.E. 1052 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1897)
Chicago and Erie Railroad Co. v. Barnes
38 N.E. 428 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1894)