Gladium Co., Inc. v. Thatcher

California Court of Appeal

Gladium Co., Inc. v. Thatcher

267 P. 1118, 92 Cal. App. 265, 1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 769

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedMay 29, 1928

DocketDocket No. 3213.

StatusPublished

This text of 267 P. 1118 (Gladium Co., Inc. v. Thatcher) 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

Gladium Co., Inc. v. Thatcher, 267 P. 1118, 92 Cal. App. 265, 1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 769 (Cal. Ct. App. 1928).

Pincite

Opinion

THE COURT.

[1] This is a motion to affirm the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the appellant has failed to set forth in its opening brief, or in a supplement thereto, in accordance with the requirements of section 953c of the Code of Civil Procedure, "a sufficient part of the record to justify a reversal of the judgment."

The brief contains a statement of the points on which the appellant relies and cites the pages of the transcript on which it is claimed the evidence sustains the contentions made. Brief excerpts, selected from other parts of the evidence, are set forth. While the brief is on the border line of insufficiency, it appears that the ends of justice will be best served by a decision on the merits rather than on the technical ground urged by the respondent.

The motion is denied.

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

THE COURT.

[1] This is a motion to affirm the judgment of the trial court on the ground that the appellant has failed to set forth in its opening brief, or in a supplement thereto, in accordance with the requirements of section 953c of the Code of Civil Procedure, "a sufficient part of the record to justify a reversal of the judgment."

The brief contains a statement of the points on which the appellant relies and cites the pages of the transcript on which it is claimed the evidence sustains the contentions made. Brief excerpts, selected from other parts of the evidence, are set forth. While the brief is on the border line of insufficiency, it appears that the ends of justice will be best served by a decision on the merits rather than on the technical ground urged by the respondent.

The motion is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

267 P. 1118, 92 Cal. App. 265, 1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 769, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gladium-co-inc-v-thatcher-calctapp-1928.