Legal Opinion
Haynes v. Haynes
Indiana Court of Appeals
Decided November 26, 1975No. 2-675A157PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
— The appellee previously filed in this . cause her Motion to Dismiss or Affirm which alleged various defects in . the record, of the proceedings and the appellant’s brief. Thereafter the Court denied the Motion to Dismiss,. ordered the Motion to Affirm held in abeyance and ordered the appellant to rebrief, said amended brief to be prepared in accordance with Rule AP. 8.3, and to be filed within 20 days, failing which, the motion to affirm.would be sustained. .
The appellant has now filed his amended brief. Again, the amended brief fails to comply with the rule, more particularly, AP. 8.3 (A)…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Williams v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1973
- Citizens National Bank of Grant County v. HarveyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- Rabb v. MillerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1974
- Bell v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 1975
3Cited by6 opinions
- McGill v. Muddy Fork of Silver Creek Watershed Conservancy DistrictIndiana Court of Appeals · 1977
- Kerkhof v. Dependable Delivery, Inc.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1975
- Roger Jay Piatek, M.D., and the Piatek Institute v. Shairon BealeIndiana Court of Appeals · 2013
- McGill v. MUDDY FORK OF SILVER CREEK, ETC.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1977
- Liszkai v. LiszkaiIndiana Court of Appeals · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.