Case ID: ind-app_113/html/0231-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Dowell, J. —", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Lee v. Wagner.
    [No. 17,029.
    Filed April 5, 1943.]
    
      George 0. Cowan and Lawrence C. Ammon, both of Indianapolis, for appellant.
    
      Lester C. Morris, of Indianapolis, for appellee.
   Dowell, J. —

This is an appeal from a judgment against the appellant on appellee’s complaint for money had and received. Answer and cross-complaint by appellant. The cause was tried to the court without a jury, resulting in finding for the appellee on his complaint and against the appellant on his answer and cross-complaint and judgment accordingly.

Appellant filed his motion for a new trial, which was overruled by the court,

Error assigned is the action of the trial court in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Appellee contends that appellant has failed to comply with Rule 2-17-F of Rules of the Supreme and Appellate Courts in that the motion for a new trial is not set out in appellant’s brief and that, under the rule above noted, no question for review or determination is ■presented to this court.

Appellee’s contention is correct. Neither the motion for a new trial, nor the substance thereof is to be found in the brief. No question is presented. Fluck, Jr. v. Dahlberg (1937), 103 Ind. App. 472, 8 N. E. (2d) 1008; Henderson v. Country Pub. Co. (1914), 57 Ind. App. 414, 107 N. E. 295; Johnson v. State (1938), 213 Ind. 659, 14 N. E. (2d) 96; Peel v. Overstreet (1921), 190 Ind. 290, 130 N. E. 113.

Judgment, therefore, is affirmed.

Blessing, C. J., not participating.

Note. — Reported in 47 N. E. (2d) 828.