Patterson

Patterson v. Almond City Land & Development Co.

Good Law
1919 Cal. App. LEXIS 45·40 Cal. App. 285·180 P. 823
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 14, 1919Civ. No. 2732.California1,336 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Haven, J.

J.—The appeal is from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff in a suit to rescind a contract for the exchange of real property upon the ground of fraud, and to set aside a prior judgment of the superior court in Alameda County in a suit which grew out of one phase of the dealings between the parties under the contract. The appeal is taken in the so-called “alternative” method. The typewritten transcript of testimony covers something over four hundred pages and the findings of fact alone cover twelve typewritten pages. [1] As an appendix to appellants’ brief there is printed what is designated a resume of the evidence of three witnesses, with some references to transcript pages. In the brief itself are certain conclusions of fact, to support which no reference is made either to the transcript or the appendix. There is nothing printed in either brief to inform the court clearly what the issues were before the lower court, and but a single one of the findings is printed, and that in the appendix to respondent’s brief. Under these circumstances, the court will not examine the voluminous typewritten transcript in search of error upon which to base a reversal. (Scott v. Hollywood Park…

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.