Williams v. Williams

Indiana Court of Appeals

Williams v. Williams

112 N.E.2d 305, 123 Ind. App. 495, 1953 Ind. App. LEXIS 157

CourtIndiana Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 18, 1953

Docket18,420

StatusPublished

Cited by9 cases

This text of 112 N.E.2d 305 (Williams v. Williams) 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

Williams v. Williams, 112 N.E.2d 305, 123 Ind. App. 495, 1953 Ind. App. LEXIS 157 (Ind. Ct. App. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

Royse, C. J.

— Appellant filed her brief in this court April 17, 1953. Appellee Williams has filed his petition to affirm the judgment because appellant’s brief does not comply with Rule 2-17, Rules of the Supreme Court of Indiana.

An examination of appellant’s brief discloses it is not indexed; it does not set out a concise statement of the record or the assignment of errors here. This court could not determine whether or not appellant has properly presented a question without searching the record. Since the filing of appellee’s motion, appellant has neither filed a request to amend her brief nor made any reply to said motion. While we always prefer to decide cases on their merits we may not do so when an appellant fails to comply with the Rules of the Supreme Court.-

■' Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 112 N. E. 2d 405.

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

Royse, C. J.

— Appellant filed her brief in this court April 17, 1953. Appellee Williams has filed his petition to affirm the judgment because appellant’s brief does not comply with Rule 2-17, Rules of the Supreme Court of Indiana.

An examination of appellant’s brief discloses it is not indexed; it does not set out a concise statement of the record or the assignment of errors here. This court could not determine whether or not appellant has properly presented a question without searching the record. Since the filing of appellee’s motion, appellant has neither filed a request to amend her brief nor made any reply to said motion. While we always prefer to decide cases on their merits we may not do so when an appellant fails to comply with the Rules of the Supreme Court.-

■' Judgment affirmed.

Note. — Reported in 112 N. E. 2d 405.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

112 N.E.2d 305, 123 Ind. App. 495, 1953 Ind. App. LEXIS 157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-williams-indctapp-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack