Case Name: Lagle v. The Moneyweight Scale Company et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Indiana
Jurisdiction: Indiana
Decision Date: 1913-11-20
Citations: 180 Ind. 463
Docket Number: No. 22,492
Parties: Lagle v. The Moneyweight Scale Company et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Indiana Reports
Volume: 180
Pages: 463–464

Head Matter:
Lagle v. The Moneyweight Scale Company et al.
[No. 22,492.
Filed November 20, 1913.]
1. Appeal. — Questions Reviewable. — Motion for New Wrial.— Briefs. — No question is presented on appeal on the overruling of a motion for a new trial, where neither the terms nor the substance of the motion is set out in appellant’s brief, and no attempt is made to give a recital of the evidence in narrative or any other form. p. 464.
Note. — Reported in 103 N. E. 100. See, also, 2 Cyc. 1013; 3 Cyc. 175, 176.
From Lawrence Circuit Court; James B. Wilson, Judge.
Action by 'William F. Lagle against Tbe Moneyweight Scale Company and others. From a judgment for defendants, the plaintiff appeals. (Transferred from the Appellate Court under §1405 Burns 1908, Acts 1901 p. 590.)
Affirmed.
Joseph Giles and Samuel S. Doman, for appellant.
Brooks & Brooks, for appellees.

Opinion:
Spencer, C. J.
This is an action by appellant against appellees to enjoin the collection of a judgment alleged to be void. The cause was tried by the Lawrence Circuit Court and from a finding and judgment in favor of appellees this appeal is taken. The only assignment of error presented by appellant challenges the action of the circuit court in overruling appellant's motion for a new trial. Neither the terms nor the substance of this motion is set out in appellant's brief, nor has any attempt been made to give a recital of the evidence in narrative or any other form. We must hold that no question is presented for our consideration. Lee v. State (1912), 177 Ind. 232, 97 N. E. 785; Tongret v. Carlin (1905), 165 Ind. 489, 75 N. E. 887; Dillon v. State (1911), 48 Ind. App. 495, 96 N. E. 171.
Judgment affirmed.