Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MELVIN ET AL. v. HAMILTON, ADMINISTRATOR.

APPEAL — Briefs — Statement of Record — Failure to Set Out Motion for New Trial. — Where the sole error assigned was overruling the motion for new trial, and appellant's briefs failed to set out a copy of the motion, or to show that any time was given to file a bill of exceptions containing the evidence, or that any such bill was filed, no question was presented for review.

WOOD, J.

This is an attempted appeal from a judgment of the Franklin Circuit Court. The sole error assigned for reversal is the overruling of appellant's motion for a new trial. The appellants have failed to set out a copy of their motion for a new trial or the substance thereof in their brief. The brief also fails to show that any time was given in which to file a bill of exceptions containing the evidence and proceedings of the trial court or that any bill of exceptions approved by such court was ever filed and made a part of the record. Thus no question is presented for our consideration. State ex rel. v. Hinds (1929), 200 Ind. 613, 165 N.E. 754; United Paperboard Co. v. Muncie, etc., Co. (1926), 84 Ind. App. 333, 151 N.E. 365; Indiana Service Corporation v. Daily (1928), 87 Ind. App. 6, 159 N.E. 767; Rule 21, Supreme and Appellate Courts.

The death of appellee having been suggested the judgment is affirmed as of date of submission.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MELVIN v. HAMILTON, ADMR
(Feb 6, 1936)