Demund v. Meade

Arizona Supreme Court

Demund v. Meade

108 P. 479, 13 Ariz. 236, 1910 Ariz. LEXIS 88

CourtArizona Supreme Court

DecidedApril 2, 1910

DocketCivil No. 1139

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 108 P. 479 (Demund v. Meade) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Arizona Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Demund v. Meade, 108 P. 479, 13 Ariz. 236, 1910 Ariz. LEXIS 88 (Ark. 1910).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this cause the appellant has failed to file the printed abstract required by rule 1 of this court (8 Ariz. iv, 71 Pac. vi). The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the abstract required by the rule. The purpose of the abstract is to enable each of the justices sitting to have a copy of the record before him, and the requirement of the rule must be complied with. Furthermore, none of the assignments of error is sufficiently alleged.

The appeal is dismissed.

CAMPBELL, J., not sitting.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this cause the appellant has failed to file the printed abstract required by rule 1 of this court (8 Ariz. iv, 71 Pac. vi). The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the abstract required by the rule. The purpose of the abstract is to enable each of the justices sitting to have a copy of the record before him, and the requirement of the rule must be complied with. Furthermore, none of the assignments of error is sufficiently alleged.

The appeal is dismissed.

CAMPBELL, J., not sitting.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

108 P. 479, 13 Ariz. 236, 1910 Ariz. LEXIS 88, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/demund-v-meade-ariz-1910.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack