Union Traction Co. v. Wolf

127 N.E. 564, 73 Ind. App. 392, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 132
Indiana Court of Appeals·Decided June 2, 1920·No. No. 10,434·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Nichols, J.

Appellee has failed to file any brief. 'It has been repeatedly held by this court and by the Supreme Court that a failure on the part of the appellee to file a brief may be treated as a confession of error, warranting reversal. Eigelsbach v. Kanne (1915), 184 Ind. 62, 110 N. E. 549; Huddleston v. Huddleston (1916), 184 Ind. 168, 110 N. E. 980; Veit v. Windhorst (1916), 184 Ind. 351, 110 N. E. 666. Having examined [393]*393appellant’s brief, we are satisfied that in this case the rule should be invoked.

Judgment reversed, with instruction to the trial court to grant a new trial.

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

Union Traction Co. v. Wolf, 127 N.E. 564, 73 Ind. App. 392, 1920 Ind. App. LEXIS 132 (Ind. Ct. App. 1920).

127 N.E. 564 (Union Traction Co. v. Wolf) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bryant v. School Town of Oakland City
171 N.E. 378 (Indiana Supreme Court, 1930)
Goldberg v. Hauer
142 N.E. 125 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1924)