Newsom v. Newsom

ON SUGGESTION OF ERROR

Appellant’s counsel has filed a 49 page suggestion of error in which he contends primarily that the Court’s original decision affirming the decree of the chancery court was error, because we did not hold that appellees representing three-fifths of the interests in the property in question had admitted in their cross-bill that the 1922 deed to appellant was delivered to her. Complaint is made that our opinion did not discuss that.

Appellant raised this point for the first time in her rebuttal brief. The opinion did not refer to the same because the point was manifestly and…