Dewing

Dewing v. Gin S. Chow

Good Law
129 Cal. App. 441·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 1146·19 P.2d 12
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 1933Docket No. 7522.California1,502 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Works, J.

This is an action to recover fees for services rendered by an official reporter of the superior court. Judgment went for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.

Early in the brief of appellants six certain points are stated as those made for a reversal of the judgment. Each of these points is circumstantially couched and was evidently drawn with care. They are inserted at the close of the portion of the brief devoted to a statement of the facts of the case. In the remaining portion of the brief, that devoted to argument, not one of these six points is inserted, in terms, as a heading to any portion of the printed discussion. One or two of them do not appear, even in briefer style, as headings. One or two are set down as headings in a much curtailed and abbreviated form. In disposing of the appeal we shall pay no attention to the six points, unargued as they are, but shall consider only the arguments advanced, all .being put forth, as we have said, under “points” otherwise stated. Such a course is proper under the well-known rule that questions suggested in a brief but not argued are not to be considered. The points which are discussed in the brief are four in number.

The first point…

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.