Legal Opinion

Best v. Martin

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 10, 1932No. Docket No. 7167PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

FRICKE, J., pro tem.

Appellant’s opening brief wholly fails to comply with that portion of rule VIII of the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal, which requires that “the briefs must present each point separately, under an appropriate heading, showing the nature of the question to be presented”. This court has repeatedly called attention to the provisions of this rule and the penalties involved for its violation. (See Barnes v. Cocke, 99 Cal. App. 700 [279 Pac. 190], wherein appellant’s brief was stricken from the files; Withers v. Southern Pac. Co., 101 Cal. App. 373 [281 Pac. 518],…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hawkins v. DoolittleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  2. Barnes v. CockeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  3. Burns v. Renaker Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
  4. People v. YaroslawskyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Withers v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1929

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Milano v. BulleriCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API