Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Hirsch

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided July 3, 1942No. 6994Published

1Dissent

BUDGE, J.,

dissenting. — There was no brief filed by or on behalf of appellant. Therefore, no assignments of error are before this court for consideration. (Thomas v. Union Sav. Etc., Co., 38 Ida. 247, 221 Pac. 132; Rosa v. Devingenzo, 53 Ida. 213, 24 Pac. (2d) 1051; Bicandi v. Boise Payette Lbr. Co., 55 Ida. 543, 44 Pac. (2d) 1103.)

The refused instruction does not correctly state the law and was properly refused. Furthermore the refused instruction is fully covered in the instructions given by the court of its own motion. Conceding that the refused instruction is in part correct and in part…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. State v. Van VlackIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
  2. Mow v. PeopleSupreme Court of Colorado · 1903
  3. Bicandi v. Boise Payette Lumber Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1935
  4. People v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1907
  5. State v. KnudtsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1905

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API