Ferslew v. Andersen

California Court of Appeal

Ferslew v. Andersen

53 P.2d 768, 11 Cal. App. 2d 400, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 362

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedJanuary 23, 1936

DocketCiv. No. 10780

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 53 P.2d 768 (Ferslew v. Andersen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ferslew v. Andersen, 53 P.2d 768, 11 Cal. App. 2d 400, 1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 362 (Cal. Ct. App. 1936).

Pincite

Opinion

McCOMB, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondent after a trial before a court without a jury.

Appellant has not observed the provision of Rule VIII, section 2, of this court, which requires that the question involved on appeal in a civil action be set forth on the first page of the opening brief without any other matter appearing thereon. (Rule VIII, sec. 2, p. 10, Rules of the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California.)

In the instant case there is a total absence of a compliance with the foregoing rule. This court cannot assume the task of searching the record for the purpose of discovering errors not pointed out by counsel. It is the duty of counsel to comply with Rule VIII, supra, in its entirety.

For the foregoing reasons the appeal is dismissed.

Grail, P. J., and Wood, J., concurred.

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