Case ID: ariz_13/html/0236-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[Civil No. 1139.
    Filed April 2, 1910.]
    [108 Pac. 479.]
    A. L. DEMUND, Defendant and Appellant, v. JENNIE MEADE, Plaintiff and Appellee.
    1. Appeal and Error — Transcript of Reporter’s Notes — Substitution for Abstract. — The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the printed abstract on appeal, required by supreme court rule 1 (71 Pac. vi).
    2. Same — Dismissal of Appeal — Absence of Abstract and Sufficient Assignments. — In absence of a- printed abstract required by supreme court rule 1 (71 Pae. vi), and sufficient assignments of error, an appeal will be dismissed.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the District Court of the First Judicial District, in and for Yuma County.
    Appeal dismissed.
    Wupperman & Wupperman and Thos. D. Molloy, for Appellant.
    Clement H. Colman and C. L. Brown, for Appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

In this cause the appellant has failed to file the printed abstract required by rule 1 of this court (8 Ariz. iv, 71 Pac. vi). The transcript of the reporter’s notes does not serve the purpose of the abstract required by the rule. The purpose of the abstract is to enable each of the justices sitting to have a copy of the record before him, and the requirement of the rule must be complied with. Furthermore, none of the assignments of error is sufficiently alleged.

The appeal is dismissed.

CAMPBELL, J., not sitting.