From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Chandlee v. McCalla

Supreme Court of California.Department One
Feb 6, 1919
179 Cal. 678 (Cal. 1919)

Opinion

L. A. No. 4707.

February 6, 1919.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Fred H. Taft, Judge. Affirmed.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

A.F. Campbell, for Appellants.

A.B. Perdue, for Respondent.


The defendants appeal from a judgment against them for $357.87. The record is brought up in typewritten form under section 953a et seq. of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The appellants have filed a brief covering something less than two printed pages. They state therein that the action was brought to recover damages for the breach of a written contract, and claim that the complaint fails to allege non-performance of any act which they had undertaken to perform. They do not, however, print any part of the complaint, and content themselves with copying a single disconnected clause of the contract. There is thus a total failure to comply with the requirement of section 953c that the parties must "print in their briefs, or in a supplement appended thereto, such portions of the record as they desire to call to the attention of the court." The fragmentary references in appellants' brief are entirely insufficient to enable the court to reach an adequate understanding of the case. Under these circumstances, we are not called upon to consider the point sought to be made. ( O'Rourke v. Skellenger, 169 Cal. 270, [ 146 P. 633]; Miller v. Oliver, 174 Cal. 404, [ 163 P. 357]; Estate of Keith, 175 Cal. 26, [ 165 P. 10].)

The judgment is affirmed.

Shaw, J., and Lawlor, J., concurred.


Summaries of

Chandlee v. McCalla

Supreme Court of California.Department One
Feb 6, 1919
179 Cal. 678 (Cal. 1919)
Case details for

Chandlee v. McCalla

Case Details

Full title:LEWIS CHANDLEE, Respondent, v. E. E. McCALLA et al., Appellants

Court:Supreme Court of California.Department One

Date published: Feb 6, 1919

Citations

179 Cal. 678 (Cal. 1919)
178 P. 709

Citing Cases

Tobey v. Randall

[1] Where the record is prepared under the "alternative method" now allowed, and the parties do not cause to…

Palmer v. Medico Dental Bldg. Corp.

The provisions of section 953c have been repeatedly pointed out in the decisions and the appellant having…