Legal Opinion

Bernstein v. Congregation Anshi Sfart

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 15, 1936No. Civ. No. 10929PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McCOMB, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents after a trial before a court without a jury.

Appellant has failed in his opening brief to present each point separately under an appropriate heading, showing the nature of the question to be presented and the point to be made without any other matter appearing thereon. (Rule VIII, sec. 2, p. 10, Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California.) (Battson v. Kirkpatrick, 11 Cal. App. (2d) 283 [53 Pac. (2d) 762]; *97Ferslew v. Andersen, 11 Cal. App. (2d) 400 [53 Pac. (2d) 768].)

In Adams…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Adams v. Standard Accident InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  2. Battson v. KirkpatrickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Ferslew v. AndersenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Graybeal v. Press-Telegram Publishing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
  2. Chichester v. Bank of America National Trust & Savings Ass'nCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. Driscoll v. ShippCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API