Meadows v. Hickman

73 N.E.2d 343, 225 Ind. 146, 1947 Ind. LEXIS 111
CourtIndiana Supreme Court
DecidedJune 10, 1947
DocketNo. 28,281.
StatusPublished
Cited by37 cases

This text of 73 N.E.2d 343 (Meadows v. Hickman) 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
Meadows v. Hickman, 73 N.E.2d 343, 225 Ind. 146, 1947 Ind. LEXIS 111 (Ind. 1947).

Opinion

Starr, J.

This is an appeal from the Circuit Court of Shelby County from an interlocutory order appointing a receiver. Appellees have not filed a brief in support of the judgment of the trial court. This court has well said:

*147 “The neglect of an appellee to file a brief controverting the errors complained of by an appellant may be taken or deemed to be a confession of such errors, and the judgment may accordingly be reversed, and the cause remanded without prejudice to either party. This rule was not declared in the interest of an appellant, but for the protection of the court, in order to relieve it of the burden of controverting the arguments and contentions advanced for reversal, which duty properly rests upon counsel for the appellee.” Miller v. Julian (1904), 163 Ind. 582, 584, 72 N. E. 588.
Again it has been said:
“Another cogent reason for invoking this rule is that the time of the court should be devoted to cases that are properly briefed. Litigants who are making a good-faith effort to help the court should not be delayed while this court attempts to perform the duties of counsel.” Roth v. Vandalia R. Co. (1918), 187 Ind. 302, 119 N. E. 1.

See also Deatrick v. Lawless (1923), 193 Ind. 327, 139 N. E. 587; City of Shelbyville v. Adams (1916), 185 Ind. 326, 114 N. E. 1; Brown v. State (1915), 184 Ind. 254, 108 N. E. 861, 111 N. E. 8; Burroughs v. Burroughs (1913), 180 Ind. 380, 103 N. E. 1.

The rule herein announced is not for the benefit of the appellants but for the protection of the court and whether it shall be invoked is discretionary with the court.

The rule will not be invoked unless the appellants’ brief makes an apparent or prima fade showing of reversible error. Pittsburg, etc., R. Co. v. Linder (1925), 195 Ind. 569, 145 N. E. 885; Bryant v. School Town of Oakland City (1930), 202 Ind. 254, 171 N. E. 378, 173 N. E. 268; Reed, Admr. v. Brown (1939), 215 Ind. 417, 19 N. E. (2d) 1015. In our opinion appellants’ brief does make such a showing.

*148 The order appointing a receiver is hereby reversed and the trial court is directed to vacate the same without prejudice to either party and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.

Emmert, J., not participating.

Note.—Reported in 73 N. E. (2d) 343.

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

Related

MacWhorter v. Derwinski
2 Vet. App. 133 (Veterans Claims, 1992)
State v. Moles
337 N.E.2d 543 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1975)
Bill v. Bill
290 N.E.2d 749 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1972)
Mays v. Parker
258 N.E.2d 666 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1970)
Eldridge v. Board of Zoning Appeals
256 N.E.2d 704 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1970)
Robinson v. Priest
256 N.E.2d 582 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1970)
Harrington v. Hartman
233 N.E.2d 189 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1967)
Jordan v. Johnson
211 N.E.2d 623 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1965)
Blue & White Service, Inc. v. Public Service Commission
205 N.E.2d 552 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1965)
Ellet v. Ellet
205 N.E.2d 555 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1965)
Fagan v. ROYER
193 N.E.2d 64 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1963)
U. S. Steel Corp. v. Cicilian
180 N.E.2d 381 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1962)
YOUNG v. Schreiner
161 N.E.2d 611 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1959)
MUCKER, ADMR. ETC. v. Pub. Svc. Comm. of Ind.
157 N.E.2d 308 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1959)
Mucker v. Public Service Commission
157 N.E.2d 308 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1959)
Whitaker v. Whitaker
147 N.E.2d 596 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1958)
Newton D/B/a, Etc. v. Hunt D/B/a, Etc.
142 N.E.2d 643 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1957)
Lunsford v. Maida
140 N.E.2d 762 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1957)
Wilson v. Wilson
131 N.E.2d 658 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1956)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
73 N.E.2d 343, 225 Ind. 146, 1947 Ind. LEXIS 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meadows-v-hickman-ind-1947.