Tucker v. Tucker

Appellate Court of Illinois

Tucker v. Tucker

174 Ill. App. 251, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 280

CourtAppellate Court of Illinois

DecidedNovember 7, 1912

DocketGen. No. 17,327

StatusPublished

This text of 174 Ill. App. 251 (Tucker v. Tucker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Court of Illinois primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Tucker v. Tucker, 174 Ill. App. 251, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 280 (Ill. Ct. App. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error was sued out to reverse a decree in which the Superior Court dismissed both the complainant’s bill for separate maintenance and the defendant’s cross-bill for divorce. Both the abstracts and briefs of plaintiff in error filed in this court are printed in smaller type than is required for abstracts by rule 19 of the Rules of Practice of this court. Experience has shown that the small pica type with leaded lines required by the rule mentioned is as small as can be safely used without injury to the eyesight, when the constant daily study of briefs and abstracts such as the volume of work in this court demands, is considered. We must insist upon a strict observance of this rule, as a matter of ordinary self-protection.

For this reason the writ of error will be dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

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

Mr. Justice Fitch

delivered the opinion of the court.

This writ of error was sued out to reverse a decree in which the Superior Court dismissed both the complainant’s bill for separate maintenance and the defendant’s cross-bill for divorce. Both the abstracts and briefs of plaintiff in error filed in this court are printed in smaller type than is required for abstracts by rule 19 of the Rules of Practice of this court. Experience has shown that the small pica type with leaded lines required by the rule mentioned is as small as can be safely used without injury to the eyesight, when the constant daily study of briefs and abstracts such as the volume of work in this court demands, is considered. We must insist upon a strict observance of this rule, as a matter of ordinary self-protection.

For this reason the writ of error will be dismissed.

Writ of error dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

174 Ill. App. 251, 1912 Ill. App. LEXIS 280, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tucker-v-tucker-illappct-1912.