Shumaker v. Stultz

Indiana Court of Appeals

Shumaker v. Stultz

131 N.E.2d 153, 126 Ind. App. 151, 1956 Ind. App. LEXIS 99

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedJanuary 10, 1956

DocketNo. 18,712

StatusPublished

This text of 131 N.E.2d 153 (Shumaker v. Stultz) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shumaker v. Stultz, 131 N.E.2d 153, 126 Ind. App. 151, 1956 Ind. App. LEXIS 99 (Ind. Ct. App. 1956).

Pincite

Opinion

Crumpacker, J.

The appellant brought this suit to recover the value of certain work and labor he claims to have performed for the appellee at his special instance and request. At the close of the appellant’s case the court directed a verdict for the appellee upon which judgment was duly entered. The appellant charges that this was error but his brief contains no recital of the evidence in any form or place and we have no way of judging whether or not he made a case which was entitled to go to the jury without resort to the record. This we are not required to do for the purpose of discovering grounds for reversal. Getto v. Getto (1947), 117 Ind. App. 623, 73 N. E. 2d 350. As all assigned error in this appeal requires a consideration of the evidence for determination, the appellant’s brief presents no question.

Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 131 N. E. 2d 153.

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

Crumpacker, J.

The appellant brought this suit to recover the value of certain work and labor he claims to have performed for the appellee at his special instance and request. At the close of the appellant’s case the court directed a verdict for the appellee upon which judgment was duly entered. The appellant charges that this was error but his brief contains no recital of the evidence in any form or place and we have no way of judging whether or not he made a case which was entitled to go to the jury without resort to the record. This we are not required to do for the purpose of discovering grounds for reversal. Getto v. Getto (1947), 117 Ind. App. 623, 73 N. E. 2d 350. As all assigned error in this appeal requires a consideration of the evidence for determination, the appellant’s brief presents no question.

Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 131 N. E. 2d 153.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

131 N.E.2d 153, 126 Ind. App. 151, 1956 Ind. App. LEXIS 99, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shumaker-v-stultz-indctapp-1956.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack