Fairchild v. Steiner

• Decision Date: 27 July 1965
• Docket Number: No. 20291,20291
• Citation: 209 N.E.2d 266,137 Ind.App. 400
• Parties: Perry J. FAIRCHILD et al., Appellants, v. Russell STEINER et al., Appellees.
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

Page 266

209 N.E.2d 266

137 Ind.App. 400

Perry J. FAIRCHILD et al., Appellants, v. Russell STEINER et al., Appellees.

No. 20291.

Appellate Court of Indiana, In Banc.

July 27, 1965.

[137 INDAPP 400] Helmke, Philips & Beams, Hoffman, Moppert & Solomon, Arnold & George, Ft. Wayne, for appellants.

Arthur H. Fruechtenicht, Robert J. Parrish, Ft. Wayne, Winslow Van Horne, Auburn, Van Horne & Van Horne, Auburn, of counsel, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Certain of the appellees herein have filed their motion to dismiss this appeal, or, in the [137 INDAPP 401] alternative that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed. In said motion they specify twelve errors, irregularities and insufficiencies in the transcript; that appellants' brief does not sufficiently comply with Rule 2-17(c), (d) and (e) of the Supreme Court; and that the assignment of errors is fatally defective.

Appellants originated this action in the trial court by filing a complaint for injunction and declaratory judgment attacking the validity of a purported reorganization of schools. Appellants thereafter filed a first supplemental complaint and a second supplemental complaint. Appellees then filed a motion to dismiss which was sustained by the trial court. Appellants thereafter filed their motion to reconsider said ruling, which the trial court denied.

Appellants' purported statement of the record in the brief contains merely the prayers of the complaint, first supplemental complaint and second supplemental complaint. The motion to dismiss and exhibits filed by appellees in the trial court, which was sustained, comprise twenty-six pages in the transcript. Appellants summarize only one of the fifteen grounds in their statement of the record. The trial judge's ruling on said motion to dismiss is not set forth in the brief or adequately summarized, nor do we have the benefit of appellants' motion to reconsider said ruling upon which this appeal is predicated.

Appellees, in their motion to dismiss, attack not only the Concise Statement of the Record portion of appellants' brief as inadequate, but also the argument section thereof and the transcript and assignment of errors.

Appellants' original brief is required to be prepared in such a manner that a printed copy of the record [137 INDAPP 402] for each judge will be unnecessary for him to be properly advised on each matter involved in the appeal. Board of Medical Registration and Examination, etc. v. Bowman (1958), 238 Ind. 532, 533, 150...