Opinion
No. 17,473.
Filed April 16, 1946. Rehearing Denied May 21, 1946.
1. APPEAL — Assignment of Errors — Improper Independent Assignments — Effect. — Assignments that the decision is contrary to law, is not sustained by sufficient evidence, is clearly against the weight of the evidence, and is against the law and the evidence, and that the court erred in admitting certain evidence, are not proper independent assignments of error and present nothing for review. p. 612.
2. APPEAL — Assignment of Errors — Motion for New Trial Overruled — Motion, Judgment and Pleadings Not Set Out in Brief — Effect. — An assignment of error that the court erred in overruling the motion for new trial presents nothing for review where neither the motion, the judgment nor the pleadings are set out in appellants' brief. p. 612.
From the Jefferson Circuit Court; George W. Long, Judge.
Action between John R. Jeffries and another and Sadie I.C. Hammel and another. From the judgment entered, John R. Jeffries and Carl Jeffries appealed, and the other parties moved to dismiss the appeal.
Appeal Dismissed. By the court in banc.
George W. Miles, of Madison, and Amos Jackson, of Versailles, for appellants.
Curtis Marshall, and Arthur D. Cutler, both of Madison, for appellees.
Appellees have filed herein a motion to dismiss this appeal on the ground that no question for review has been presented.
Appellants assign as error the following:
"1. That the decision of the court is contrary to law.
"2. That the decision of the court is not sustained by sufficient evidence.
"3. That the decision of the court is clearly against the evidence.
"4. That the decision of the court is against the law and the evidence.
"5. The court erred in permitting appellee to produce certain evidence at the trial of said cause over the objection of appellants.
"6. The court erred in overruling appellants' motion for a new trial of said cause."
The first five errors so assigned are not proper independent assignments. The sixth requires a consideration of appellants' motion for a new trial but the motion is not to be found 1, 2. in the brief. Neither are any of the pleadings or the judgment.
Other serious defects have been pointed out both in the brief and in the transcript. However, it sufficiently appears from the above that no question has been presented. Rule 2-17, Rules of Supreme Court.
Appeal dismissed.
NOTE. — Reported in 66 N.E.2d 76.