Gardner v. Stover

43 Ind. 356
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 43 Ind. 356 (Gardner v. Stover) 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
Gardner v. Stover, 43 Ind. 356 (Ind. 1873).

Opinion

Osborn, J.

This appeal was submitted on the 28th day of May, 1873. No brief has been filed as required by rule 14. A paper called a brief was filed on the 8th day of June, of which the following is a copy:

“ Appellant cannot in this cause discuss the reasons upon which the court below sustained the demurrer to the complaint, for the reason that the court below did not announce the reasons. The only question is, Is the appellant’s complaint sufficient upon which to base his action? The demurrer, of course, admits the facts stated as true.”

[357]*357In Deford v. Urbain, 42 Ind. 476, this court dismissed an appeal for failing to comply with the above rule. The paper filed in that case was about as explicit as in this. In that case the paper did not purport to contain any statement of the case, or to furnish the court any information.

Tidd says a brief should contain an abstract of the pleadings ; a statement of the facts of the case, with such observations as occur thereon. The great rule to be observed in drawing briefs consists in conciseness with perspicuity. Tidd Pr. 799. “ A detailed statement of a party’s case.” Bouv. Law Dict. “An abridgment of a plaintiff’s or defendant’s case, prepared by his attorney, for the instruction of counsel on a trial at law.” Burrill Law Diet.

A brief, within the meaning of rule 14, is some kind of a statement of the case for the information of the court. We will not say that it should be as full as required by an attorney to counsel. Still, it shoüld at least, purport to furnish the court some information; some aid in deciding the case. An attempt should be made to show why the judgment of the court below should be reversed or affirmed.

To say that counsel cannot discuss the reasons upon which the court below decided the case, or to notify the court that the question is upon the sufficiency of the complaint, without making any suggestion, or citing any authority, as in this case, does not purport to be a statement for the information of the court. It is no better than a blank sheet.

The appeal is dismissed, with costs.

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

Related

Bradley K. Buchanan v. State of Indiana
122 N.E.3d 969 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2019)
Keeney v. State
873 N.E.2d 187 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 2007)
Frith v. State
325 N.E.2d 186 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1975)
Webeler v. Scholle
273 N.E.2d 764 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1971)
Wyman v. Turpen
179 N.E.2d 758 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1962)
Citizens' Street Railroad v. Union Trust Co.
49 N.E. 359 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1898)
Pratt v. Allen
95 Ind. 404 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
Robbins v. Magee
96 Ind. 174 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
Kaster v. Kaster
93 Ind. 581 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1884)
Arbuckle v. Biederman
94 Ind. 168 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1883)
City of Anderson v. Neal
88 Ind. 317 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1882)
Millikan v. State ex rel. Bishop
70 Ind. 283 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1880)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
43 Ind. 356, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gardner-v-stover-ind-1873.