Furlong v. Griffin & Fullerton
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Notice of an order overruling a demurrer was served October 6th, 1857. Judgment was entered April 2d, 1858. Writ of Error issued March 28th, 1859. The Defendant in Error moves to dismiss the Writ upon the following grounds: First. — The j udgment below' was rendered and notice thereof given to the Plaintiff in Error in October 1857. The Writ of Error was not sued out until March, 1859. Second. — A Writ of Error can only be taken within one year “after the time of the…
Read the full summary
Notice of an order overruling a demurrer was served October 6th, 1857. Judgment was entered April 2d, 1858. Writ of Error issued March 28th, 1859. The Defendant in Error moves to dismiss the Writ upon the following grounds: First. — The j udgment below' was rendered and notice thereof given to the Plaintiff in Error in October 1857. The Writ of Error was not sued out until March, 1859. Second. — A Writ of Error can only be taken within one year “after the time of the rendition of the judgment,” &c. AmendHs to I¿ev. Stat., p. 13, Sec. 31. Third. — The rendition of judgment is the actual…
1Opinion of the Court
*209 By the Cowrt
— Elandrau, J.
Motion on the part of the Defendants in Error to dismiss the Writ of Error in this case on the ground that it was not brought within one year after the rendition of the judgment. The provision of statute on this point is as follows : “Writs of error in civil and criminal cases may issue of course out of the Supreme Court of this Territory in vacation as well as in term, and shall be returnable to the same Court; but no writ of error sliall be issued after the expiration of one year from the time of the rendition of the judgment to which it refers.” Compiled…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Thompson v. BickfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1872
- Humphrey v. HavensSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1864
- Gray v. HollandOregon Supreme Court · 1881