Hattabaugh v. Vollmer
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from District Court, Nez Perces County. No brief filed on the motion to dismiss appeal. The statement on motion for a new trial should have been engrossed. (Pence v. Lemp, 4 Idaho3 526, 43 Pac. • 75; Hayne on New Trial and Appeal, secs. 156, 265, 266.) No exception was taken to the order overruling the motion for a new trial. (Great Spirit Springs Go. v. Chicago Lumber Co., 47 Kan. 672, 28 Pae. 715; Coffin v. Bradbury, 3 Idaho, 770, 35 Pac. 715.)
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment, and the order overruling a motion for a new trial. A motion was made to dismiss the appeal on the three grounds following, to wit: 1. That no exception was saved to the order overruling the motion for a new trial; 2. That the transcript was not served on respondent in the time required by the rules of this court; 3. That the statement contained in the record is not such a one as the law requires.
As to the first ground: Section 4427 of the Revised Statutes declares that certain orders and decisions are deemed excepted to, and the order denying a new trial…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pence v. LempIdaho Supreme Court · 1895
- Shissler v. CrooksIdaho Supreme Court · 1871
- Miller v. Pine Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1892
- Smith v. DavisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sampson v. LaytonIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
- Crowley v. Croesus Gold & Copper Mining Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1906
- Shurtliff v. Extension Ditch Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Doust v. Rocky Mountain Bell Telephone Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
- Kimzey v. Highland Livestock & Land Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1923
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.