BERNSTEIN v. CONGREGATION ANSHI SFART OF BOYLE HEIGHTS

Reset A A Font size: Print

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

BERNSTEIN v. CONGREGATION ANSHI SFART OF BOYLE HEIGHTS et al.

Civ. 10929.

Decided: May 15, 1936

Max Schleimer, of Los Angeles, for appellant. Arch H. Vernon, Earl E. Johnson, Lawrence L. Otis, and Gilbert E. Harris (by Arch H. Vernon), all of Los Angeles, for respondents.

This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of respondents after a trial before a court without a jury.

Appellant has failed in his opening brief to present each point separately under an appropriate heading, showing the nature of the question to be presented and the point to be made without any other matter appearing thereon. Rule 8, § 2, p. 10, Rules of the Supreme Court and District Courts of Appeal of the State of California.

In Adams v. Standard Accident Insurance Co., 124 Cal.App. 393, at page 394, 12 P.(2d) 464, Mr. Justice Conrey, then Presiding Justice of the District Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District, Division 1, in commenting upon this provision of rule 8, supra, accurately states the requirement thus: “Such assignment of error should take the form of one or more stated propositions, which, if sustained, would lend reasonable support to appellant's demand for reversal of the judgment.”

This court will not assume the task of searching the record for the purpose of discovering errors not pointed out by counsel. It is the duty of counsel to comply with rule 8, supra, in its entirety.

For the foregoing reasons the appeal is dismissed. Battson v. Kirkpatrick (Cal.App.) 53 P.(2d) 762; Ferslew v. Andersen (Cal.App.) 53 P.(2d) 768.

It is so ordered.

McCOMB, Justice pro tem.

We concur: CRAIL, P. J.; WOOD, J.

Copied to clipboard