
    [Civ. No. 2101.
    Second Appellate District.
    March 2, 1918.]
    A. D. ANDERSON, Appellant, v. H. W. WILCOX et al., Respondents.
    Appeal—Judgment—Record—Printing in Bribes.—Where on an appeal from a judgment the only record consists of a typewritten transcript, and no part of the record is printed in the briefs, except the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the brief of respondents, and the facts found are sufficient t'o support the judgment, the judgment must be affirmed, since it will be presumed that counsel have presented in their briefs, all portions of the record which they desired to call to t'he attention of the appellate court.
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County. T. L. Lewis, Judge.
    The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
    H. W. Scheld, and W. J. Carr, for Appellant.
    Shreve & Shreve, for Respondents.
   CONREY, P. J.

Plaintiff appeals from the judgment. In the briefs the action is described by counsel for appellant as one in replevin to recover the possession of certain personal property, and by counsel for the respondents as an action to recover damages for alleged wrongful conversion of personal property. No part of the record has been printed in the briefs, except that the findings of fact and conclusions of law are printed in the brief of respondents.

The facts found are sufficient to sustain the judgment. Counsel for appellant say that the findings of fact are contrary to the evidence, but do not point out any particulars in which the evidence is not sufficient to support those findings. They further say in their brief that “the evidence in this case shows” certain facts stated by them, without setting forth any part of the record of such evidence. The only record on appeal consists of a typewritten transcript. It is presumed that by their briefs counsel have presented to us all portions of the record to which they desire to call our attention. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 953c.) Many decisions concerning such defective presentations of the record are collected in Barker Brothers v. Joos, ante, p. 311, [171 Pac. 1085].

The judgment is affirmed.

James, J., and Works, J., pro tern,., concurred.  