Legal Opinion

Dill v. Zielke

Washington Supreme Court

Decided October 24, 1946No. 29802Published

1Concurrence · MillardMillard, C. J.

(concurring in the result) — The motion of respondent Zielke that the judgment be affirmed for the reason that appellant has made no assignment of error should be granted. Rule 16, subds. 2 (d) and 5, Rules of the Supreme Court, 18 Wn. (2d) 17-a, provides that in the brief of appellant shall be printed assignments of error in type distinctively displayed and “each error relied on shall be clearly pointed out and discussed under appropriate designated headings.”

Rule 21, Rules of the Supreme Court, 18 Wn. (2d) 21-a, provides:

“No alleged error of the superior court will be considered by this…

Also in this document: Concurrence · Simpson.

2Cases cited98 opinions

  1. Smith v. AllwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
  2. Mahnich v. Southern Steamship Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
  3. In Re LevyWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  4. Walker v. CopelandWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  5. In Re the Eligibility for Unemployment Benefits of FoyWashington Supreme Court · 1941

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

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

Powered by the Exa API