Legal Opinion

Ross v. Mahoney

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 15, 1933No. Docket No. 1080PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

The respondents have moved to dismiss the appeal or affirm the judgment in these cases under Rule V, section 3, of the Rules of this court, upon the grounds that the opening brief filed by the appellants fails to set forth on its first page the statement required by Rule VIII, section 2; that the opening brief attacks certain instructions of the court without setting forth all other instructions given whiph bear upon the same subject; and that the appeal is frivolous and without substantial merit.

Before the time set for hearing this motion the appellants filed a printed supplement to their…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rasmussen v. Fresno Traction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1936
  2. County of Riverside v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
  3. Kelly v. LiddicoatCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

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

Powered by the Exa API