Roark v. Voshell
Indiana Court of Appeals
Prom Sullivan Circuit Court; W. E. Bridwell, Judge. Action between John Roark and another and Thomas S. Voshell and others. Prom a judgment for the latter, the former appeal.
1Opinion of the CourtShea, J.
Appellees vigorously assail the brief filed by appellants as not conforming to Rule 22 of this court. It is urged that no statement of the record is set out in appellants’ brief; that neither the complaint nor the substance thereof is set out; that neither the judgment nor the substance thereof is set out; that neither the motion and reasons for a new trial, nor the filing thereof are set out either in form or in substance. It is urged that no objection or exception is set out as having been made or taken to any ruling of the court, and that no evidence offered and rejected, or admitted over…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kaufman v. AlexanderIndiana Supreme Court · 1913
- Schreiber v. WormIndiana Supreme Court · 1904
- Bennett v. Root Furniture Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1911
- Carmody v. StateIndiana Supreme Court · 1912
- Pry v. RamageIndiana Supreme Court · 1911
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Gary & Interurban Railway Co. v. HackerIndiana Court of Appeals · 1915
- Branson v. BransonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1935
- Schaefer v. Keokuk Savings BankIndiana Court of Appeals · 1916
- Essington v. ThomasIndiana Court of Appeals · 1919
- Joseph v. HorodeskyIndiana Court of Appeals · 1916