Demund v. Meade

Decided April 2, 1910

Arizona Supreme Court · decided 1910-04-02

<p>1. Appeal and Error — Transcript of Reporter’s Notes — Substitution for Abstract. — The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the printed abstract on appeal, required by supreme court rule 1 (71 Pac. vi).</p> <p>2. Same — Dismissal of Appeal — Absence of Abstract and Sufficient Assignments. — In absence of a- printed abstract required by supreme court rule 1 (71 Pae. vi), and sufficient assignments of error, an appeal will be dismissed.</p>

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently March 1969

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed · Decided 1910-04-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1In this cause the appellant has failed to file the printed abstract required by rule 1 of this court (8 Ariz. iv, 71 Pac. vi). The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the abstract required by the rule. The purpose of the abstract is to enable each of the justices sitting to have a copy of the record before him, and the requirement of the rule must be complied with. Furthermore, none of the assignments of error is sufficiently alleged.

¶2The appeal is dismissed.

¶3CAMPBELL, J., not sitting.