Corcoran

Corcoran v. Ward

Good Law
115 Cal. App. 180·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 641·1 P.2d 455
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 25, 1931Docket No. 7834.California2,237 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Spence, J.

Two separate actions were brought to recover for personal injuries sustained by Marie F. Corcoran and Aleta Jennings, respectively, and these actions were consolidated for the purpose of trial. Judgment upon two verdicts for $30,000 each were entered and appeals .by defendants from both judgments are presented on one transcript.

At the outset we deem it appropriate to state that appellants’ brief contains no. topical index and fails to present each point separately under an appropriate heading showing the nature of the question to be presented as required by rule VIII of the Rules of the Supreme Court and the District Courts of Appeal. These rules are designed for the assistance of the court in determining the questions presented on appeal as well as to guide opposing counsel in answering the points raised. Failure to comply with the rules may result in striking the briefs from the file or even dismissal of the appeal; and if no such action is taken, complaint should not be made in the event that some point, hidden in the pages of a lengthy brief without an appropriate heading, is not discussed in the opinion. In the present case a reading of appellants’ brief leads us to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.