Simpson v. Occidental Building & Loan Assn., 1781

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
• Writing for the Court: Per Curiam.
• Citation: 45 Wyo. 425,19 P.2d 958
• Parties: SIMPSON v. OCCIDENTAL BUILDING & LOAN ASSN., ET AL
• Docket Number: 1781
• Decision Date: 13 March 1933

19 P.2d 958

45 Wyo. 425

SIMPSON
v.
OCCIDENTAL BUILDING & LOAN ASSN., ET AL

No. 1781

Supreme Court of Wyoming

March 13, 1933

APPEAL from District Court, Laramie County; SAM M. THOMPSON, Judge.

Action by David B. Simpson against the Occidental Building & Loan Association, et al.

From an adverse judgment plaintiff appeals.

Heard on motion to dismiss appeal.

Motion to dismissed overruled.

For the respondents in support of their motion to dismiss, there were oral arguments by R. N. Matson and C. A. Lathrop, of Cheyenne, Wyoming.

For the appellant in resistance of motion, there was an oral argument by C. E. Lane, of Cheyenne, Wyoming.

OPINION

[45 Wyo. 426] Per Curiam.

This case is before the court on the motion of the respondent, Occidental Building & Loan Association, to dismiss the cause for the alleged failure on the part of appellant to comply with the rules of this court, particularly Rule 37 requiring the filing of an abstract of the record as defined therein, and Rule 14, which directs that briefs shall "refer specifically to the page or portion of the record where the question under discussion arises." The case was also briefed and argued on the merits, the submission thereof being made at the same time as the presentation of the argument on the motion aforesaid.

Rule 14 of this court, in its present form, has been in force for a decade. The consequences of failure to obey its provisions appear not to have been discussed in our prior decisions. The requirements of the rule are not unusual, as many other Appellate Courts have regulations similarly phrased, all being designed for the purpose of [45 Wyo. 427] aiding and expediting the work of the reviewing tribunal. It seems to be generally held, under provisions of this character, that when they are disregarded by litigants, the court may decline to consider the questions sought to be raised.

In Hunt v. Hunt, 307 Mo. 375, 270 S.W. 365, it was held that, where appellant fails in his brief to set out the matters complained of or to state the substance thereof and refer to the place in the record where they could be found, the court was at liberty to refuse to examine them. To the same effect is Lee v. Meredith, 249 Ill.App. 274, where the court said, "When a litigant insists that error has been committed, it is his duty to point out where the evidence in support of his contention may be found in the abstract." Similarly, in City of Annapolis v. Barthel, 194 Ind. 273, 141 N.E. 339, 409, it was held that where appellant's brief fails to point out the pages of the transcript where the facts relied on or appellant's exceptions may be found, the questions attempted to be raised will not be considered. See, also, Barksdale v. State, 196 Ind. 392, 147 N.E. 765; Senrich v. Carson, 92 Ind.App. 649, 176 N.E. 874; Martin v. State, [19 P.2d 959] 93 Ind.App. 26, 177 N.E. 354; Colorado Yule Marble Co. v. Collins, 230 F. 78, 144 C. C. A. 376; Hurt v. Monumental Mercury Mining Co., 35 Idaho 295, 206 P. 184; Brown v. Gray, 190 Iowa 252, 180 N.W. 162; Moehlenbrock v. Parke, Davis & Co., 141 Minn. 154, 169 N.W. 541; Stroman v. Atlas Refining Corporation, 112 Neb. 187, 199 N.W. 26; Garver v. Lightner, 275 Pa. 401, 119 A. 482.

We have examined appellant's brief with care and find that, in a number of instances, questions are discussed without referring to the page of the record where the point involved arose. This infraction of Rule 14, aforesaid, is to be noted before passing to a discussion of the condition of the abstract of record viewed in the light of the requirements of Rule 37.

[45 Wyo. 428] The rule last mentioned has been in force for more than two years. The abstract of record, which the rule prescribes, serves many useful purposes, one of the most important of which is the condensation of a record on review, so that the parts thereof, vital and material to the proper disposition of the case, shall be presented to the court, thereby aiding the accurate and prompt disposition of its business. Among the provisions of the rule are these:

"Such abstract shall contain a brief statement of the contents of the pleadings, the judgment, the motion for a new trial, the assignments of error relied on, and such other parts of the record as may be essential; but when for a proper understanding and determination of the questions raised it may be necessary, such matters may be stated fully or in the exact words of the record."

Clearly, it must be regarded as essential that the abstract should show that the proper statutory steps were taken by appellant to give this court jurisdiction to entertain the cause. This court, in...