Hutts v. Martin

An examination of the record and briefs before us would seem to lead to the conclusion that this case had been carefully tried and a correct judgment rendered.

We are first met, however, with a motion to dismiss the appeal, several reasons being given, one that the assignment of errors does not name all the parties to the judgment.

Omitting those who filed disclaimers at the trial, there remained as parties to the judgment and decree the two plaintiffs and fourteen defendants. In the assignment of errors the plaintiffs are wholly omitted, as are also ten of the defendants. Three defendants only…