Stapp v. Roberts

Alabama Court of Appeals

Stapp v. Roberts

160 So. 558, 26 Ala. App. 378, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 80

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedMarch 26, 1935

Docket6 Div. 698.

StatusPublished

This text of 160 So. 558 (Stapp v. Roberts) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Stapp v. Roberts, 160 So. 558, 26 Ala. App. 378, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 80 (Ala. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

RICE, Judge.

In our opinion in the case of Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Smalley, 156 So. 639, 641, 1 we said: “The duty rests upon the appellant, in a civil case, to ‘point out’ error; * * * it includes pointing out, under the law — cited —why it is error.”

The quoted statement received the approval of the Supreme Court. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Smalley, ante, p. 176, 156 So. 641.

In the instant case appellant’s counsel in his brief filed here — perhaps because the “error” did not exist — has failed to comply with the rule for reversal (provided, of course, the error was prejudicial to appellant’s rights) laid down above.

*379 Hence the judgment must be, and is, affirmed.

Affirmed.

1

Ante, p. 176.

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