From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dixon v. Columbia Glass Co.

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Jan 29, 1937
18 Cal.App.2d 765 (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)

Opinion

Docket No. 11077.

January 29, 1937.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County made pursuant to section 357 of the Civil Code. Ruben S. Schmidt, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Minor Blythe for Appellants.

C.V. Caldwell for Respondents.


This is an appeal from an order made pursuant to section 357 of the Civil Code.

[1] Appellant has not observed the provision of rule VIII, section 2 of this court, which requires that the question involved on appeal in a civil action must be set forth on the first page of the opening brief without any other matter appearing thereon and must never exceed one page. (Rule VIII, sec. 2, Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California.) In the instant case the questions cover approximately two pages. Therefore, since it is the duty of counsel to comply with rule VIII, supra, in its entirety, the appeal is dismissed, pursuant to the penalty provided in section 4, rule VIII, supra. (Rule VIII, sec. 4, Rules for the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California; Ferslew v. Andersen, 11 Cal.App. (2d) 400 [ 53 P.2d 768].)

The appeal is dismissed.

Crail, P.J., and Wood, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Dixon v. Columbia Glass Co.

Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two
Jan 29, 1937
18 Cal.App.2d 765 (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)
Case details for

Dixon v. Columbia Glass Co.

Case Details

Full title:A. STANTON DIXON et al., Respondents, v. COLUMBIA GLASS COMPANY (a…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, Second District, Division Two

Date published: Jan 29, 1937

Citations

18 Cal.App.2d 765 (Cal. Ct. App. 1937)
64 P.2d 731