Court Opinion

ID: 9541453
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 16:25:35.712824+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T15:02:55.093023
License: Public Domain

Wickens, J.
— Dissenting opinion.
I respectfully dissent from the prevailing opinion. A careful examination of the briefs on the subject of the motion to dismiss, or alternatively, to affirm the judgment, does not *410convince me that a good faith effort has not been made to prepare a proper appellants’ brief.
A condensed recital of evidence is almost certain to contain some conclusions if it is in narrative form as required by the rule. A rough check of the relative space given to the evidence of each party does not seem to show undue emphasis of appellants’ evidence to the disadvantage of appellee.
I am familiar with some previous cases which seem to say 93 pages of evidence in the transcript cannot be condensed to 4 pages of narrative recital, and 600 transcript pages cannot be reduced to 29. Here the prevailing opinion says 14 pages of closely printed narrative recital of evidence is not adequate to depict 200 pages of evidence in the transcript.
This method of measuring compliance with the rules leaves much to be desired. The only proper questions are whether the brief contains a condensed recital of so much of the evidence in narrative form as is necessary to present accurately and concisely a full understanding of the questions presented. Brevity should be encouraged within those limitations. Often the more condensed the recital is, the more it presents true effort.
I favor the modern trend to consider a case on the merits and I think it possible to do so here.
I would overrule the motion to dismiss.
Hunter, J. concurs.