Chaney v. Mullis

Indiana Supreme Court

Chaney v. Mullis

102 N.E. 872, 54 Ind. App. 233, 1913 Ind. App. LEXIS 94

CourtIndiana Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 15, 1913

DocketNo. 7,891

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 102 N.E. 872 (Chaney v. Mullis) 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

Chaney v. Mullis, 102 N.E. 872, 54 Ind. App. 233, 1913 Ind. App. LEXIS 94 (Ind. 1913).

Pincite

Opinion

Lairy, J.

1. The only error assigned is, that the court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. The brief of appellant does not set out a copy of this motion or state its substance, and there is no reference in the brief to the record indicating where such motion [234]*234may be found. It is the duty of appellant to point out error and tbe court will not search the record to reverse.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Note.—Reported, in 102 N. E. 872. See, also, 2 Cyc. 1014; 3 Cyc. 419.

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

Lairy, J.

1. The only error assigned is, that the court erred in overruling appellant’s motion for a new trial. The brief of appellant does not set out a copy of this motion or state its substance, and there is no reference in the brief to the record indicating where such motion [234]*234may be found. It is the duty of appellant to point out error and tbe court will not search the record to reverse.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Note.—Reported, in 102 N. E. 872. See, also, 2 Cyc. 1014; 3 Cyc. 419.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

102 N.E. 872, 54 Ind. App. 233, 1913 Ind. App. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chaney-v-mullis-ind-1913.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack