Christy v. Arnold
Arizona Supreme Court
APPEAL from a judgment oE the District Court of the Third Judicial District in and for the County of Maricopa. A. C. Baker, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the CourtSloan, J.
Ordinarily, this court would be justified in affirming the judgment in this case upon the ground that appellant has failed to comply with the decisions and rules of this court in reference to assignments'of error. The assignments are too general, and are insufficient, in that they fail to designate and specifically point out any error in the record for our consideration. Marks v. Newmark, 3 Ariz. 224, 28 *266Pac. 960. See, also, rule of this court entered at January term, 1893. As no objection has been made by counsel for appellee to any of these assignments, and as he has at length argued the…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cleary v. FolgerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
- Shively v. Semi-Tropic Land & Water Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Marks v. NewmarkArizona Supreme Court · 1890
3Cited by9 opinions
- Portner v. TannerWyoming Supreme Court · 1923
- Tripp v. ChubbArizona Supreme Court · 1949
- Phoenix Title & Trust Co. v. HorwathArizona Supreme Court · 1933
- Kammert Bros. Enterprises, Inc. v. Tanque Verde Plaza Co.Court of Appeals of Arizona · 1967
- Hillman v. BusselleArizona Supreme Court · 1947
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.