Case ID: ind_189/html/0201-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Townsend, C. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Gardner et al. v. Newbert et al.
    [No. 23,714.
    Filed March 16, 1920.]
    
      Appeal. — Briefs.—Btifficiency.—On appeal from a conviction for Indirect contempt, alleged error in overruling motions for new trial .and to discharge the rule present no question where the appellants set out neither of the motions nor the substance thereof.
    From Lake Superior Court; Virgil 8. Reiter, Judge.
    Indirect contempt proceedings by Harry E. Newbert and others against George Gardner and others. From a judgment of conviction, the defendants appeal.
    
      Affirmed.
    
    
      Ibach, Cavit, Tinkham & Stinson, for appellant.
    
      William J. Whinery, for appellee.
   Townsend, C. J.

Appellants were convicted of indirect contempt. They claim (1) that the court erred in overruling the motion for a new trial; (2) that the court erred in overruling their separate motions to discharge the rule. They have not set out their motion for a new trial; nor have they set out their motions to discharge the rule; nor have they set out the substance of any of these motions. They have set out an information for contempt, but no such information is found in the record.

Judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Harvey, J., absent.