Case ID: ind-app_118/html/0461-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FLANAGAN, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Egger v. Huff
    [No. 17,768.
    Filed October 5, 1948.]
    
      Albert B. Chipman, of Plymouth, and Roscoe L. Egger, of Bremen, attorneys for appellant.
    
      
      Tom R. Huff, of Plymouth, attorney for appellee.
   FLANAGAN, J.

Appellant’s brief presents no question for review for the following reasons:

1. Under the heading “Errors relied upon for reversal,” no errors are set forth except such as would be grounds for a new trial, but there is nothing in the brief to inform the court whether there was a motion for a new trial or whether appellant is attempting to assign these errors independently.

2. There is no attempt to set forth a “concise statement of so much of the record as fully presents every error and exception relied upon,” as required by Rule 2-17 of the Rules of the Supreme Court.

3. None of appellant’s propositions or points are supported by authority as required by the above rule.

Judgment affirmed.

NOTE. — Reported in 81 N. E. 2d 378.