Yates v. Yates
This text of 36 App. D.C. 132 (Yates v. Yates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of thp Court:
It appearing from the record that there was a designation of the parts of the record below to be included in the tram script, directing the omissions referred to in this motion, aud no objection thereto, or further designation by the other side, it is probable that a suggestion of diminution of the record would now be too late. At any rate, it would require an affidavit accounting for failure to demand a complete record. The fact that a defective record has been brought up is ordinarily no ground for dismissing the appeal. The motion to dismiss is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
36 App. D.C. 132, 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 5968, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yates-v-yates-cadc-1910.