ERVIN COMPANY v. Hunt
ERVIN COMPANY v. Hunt
Opinion
For failure to comply with the Rules of Practice in the Court of Appeals, this appeal is subject to dismissal.
Nevertheless, we have carefully considered the merits of each of defendant’s assignments of error.
Defendant has presented twenty-four questions in her brief. Her “argument” consists of an assertion that she is entitled to a new trial because of (1) the facts contained in her statement of the case, (2) many errors cited in the case, (3) the lack of evidence presented before the courts below, (4) her absence when the judgments were entered below, and (5) the lack of validity of the judgments.
We have reviewed the record proper and are of the opinion that the judgment in this case is regular in form, that the facts found by the court support the conclusions of law in the judgment, and that no prejudicial error appears therein.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- The ERVIN COMPANY, THE ERVIN COMPANY, APARTMENT DIVISION, THE ERVIN COMPANY, D/B/A GEORGETOWN WOODS APARTMENTS AND GEORGETOWN WOODS APARTMENTS, DONNA L. COPELAND, AGENT v. GLADYS L. HUNT
- Cited By
- 2 cases
- Status
- Published