(See also Thomas v. Superior Court, 6 Cal.App. 629 [ 92 P. 739]; Howard v. Howard, 87 Cal.App. 20 [ 261 P. 714]; Title Ins. Trust Co. v. Wilson, 87 Cal.App. 143 [ 261 P. 767]; Smith v. Superior Court, 21 Cal.App.2d 160 [ 69 P.2d 176].)

No rulings of the trial court are assigned as error, yet an exhaustive analysis of the whole transcript is demanded for the purpose of determining whether or not appellant's theory of a more propitious and expedient cause of action against him is tenable. The case is so similar to that presented in Title Insurance Trust Co. v. Wilson, 87 Cal.App. 143 [ 261 P. 767, 768], wherein we called attention to repeated infractions of the rule in such cases, that we need but quote therefrom: "The provision of the code here involved is intended for the benefit of the adversary party as well as of the appellate court. It is unfair to both, and also to other litigants whose appeals are pending awaiting decision, to cause this court to devote its time to a performance of the labors of investigation and research expressly required of the appellants by law.