Thompson v. Schlesinger, 20697

• Decision Date: 18 July 1968
• Docket Number: No. 1,No. 20697,20697,1
• Citation: 238 N.E.2d 694,143 Ind.App. 131
• Parties: Dorothy THOMPSON, Appellant, v. Melvin R. SCHLESINGER, doing business as Schlesinger Realty Company, Appellee
• Court: Indiana Appellate Court

Page 694

238 N.E.2d 694

143 Ind.App. 131

Dorothy THOMPSON, Appellant, v. Melvin R. SCHLESINGER, doing business as Schlesinger Realty Company, Appellee.

No. 20697.

Appellate Court of Indiana, In Bank, Division No. 1.

July 18, 1968.

George W. McCain and Davis N. Gilyan, Gary, for appellant.

James K. Whitaker, Hammond, for appellee.

CARSON, Chief Justice.

This appeal comes to us from the Lake Superior Court. The plaintiff-appellee initiated this action to recover a commission allegedly due under a listing agreement for the sale of real estate. Trial was to the court and a finding was entered for the plaintiff. Defendant-appellant appeals. Appellant has failed to incorporate the assignment of errors and the errors specified in the motion for a new trial in the argument portion of her brief. Such an omission constitutes a violation of Rule 2--17(h) of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Indiana. Although appellant attempts to urge four (4) alleged errors in the argument portion of her brief, we are unable to determine if these alleged errors were specified in her motion for a new trial since it is not contained in the brief. Specifications of error in appellant's motion for a new trial, not argued, are deemed to be waived. Miller v. Deming Hotel Co. (1966), Ind.App., 213 N.E.2d 809, (transfer denied).

For these reasons, we are compelled to affirm the decision of the Lake Superior Court.

Judgment affirmed.

COOPER, FAULCONER, and PRIME, JJ., concur.