Court Opinion

ID: 9601232
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:40:00.357149+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T10:24:36.038245
License: Public Domain

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE ADAIR:
(concurring in part and dissenting in part).
The appellants wholly failed to set forth in their brief any specification of the errors relied upon by them thereby failing to comply with the requirements of subsections lettered e and d of subdivision 3 of Rule X of this court for which reasons the judgment of the district court should be affirmed. However the majority opinion assumes to decide questions which were never presented to the trial judge nor raised in his court and on which no error has been assigned or specified in this court and which are not properly presented to us for review.. The statements and conclusions so indulged by the justices on questions and points of law not in issue nor properly before *115this court on this appeal are purely gratuitous observations that have no greater force or weight than mere obiter dictum.
For these reasons I concur in affirming the judgment of the district court but cannot agree with what is said in the majority opinion nor in the attempt to therein determine constitutional questions entirely unnecessary to a determination of this case or to upholding the district court’s decree and order.