Ogle v. Manlove

Decided December 14, 1892

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1892-12-14

<p>Appeal. — Dismissal of.— Violation of Rule of Supreme Court. — Insufficiency of Brief. — Where an appellant, in his brief, cites no authority and attempts no argument in support of his assignment of errors, there is such a violation of a rule of this court as will work a dismissal of the appeal.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1896

1 state decisions

Relies on Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. Grantham · City of Anderson v. Neal

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1892-12-14

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Coffey, J,

¶1This was an action in the Circuit Court by the appellants against the appellees, to enjoin the latter from opening a certain public highway in Tipton County, established by the board' of commissioners. To certain answers filed by the appellees the court overruled a demurrer, to which ruling the appellants excepted. This ruling is assigned as error.

¶2No brief is filed by the appellants, except what is called a supersedeas brief. In this so-called brief no authority is cited, nor is any argument attempted. There is no attempt to point out any error in the ruling of the Circuit Court.

¶3This is not a compliance with rule twenty of this court.

¶4The appeal should be dismissed on account of the failure of the appellants to comply with the terms of this rule. City of Anderson v. Neal, 88 Ind. 317; Louisville, etc., R. W. Co. v. Grantham, 104 Ind. 353.

¶5Appeal dismissed.