Legal Opinion · Dissent

Williams v. Rice

Nevada Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1878No. 878Published

Appeal from the District Court of the Second Judicial District, Ormsby County. The facts appear in the opinion.

1DissentBeatty, J.

In my opinion the statement contained in this record, although it is erititled, “statement on motion for new trial,” can and ought to be treated as a statement on appeal. The statute is not responsible for the phrases “statement on appeal” and “statement on motion for new trial.” These are merely convenient forms of expression which have come to be employed in order to designate the purpose for which a statement has been made or the manner in which it has been used. They are not the law and do not determine the rights of parties. What the law provides for, and all that it provides for, in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Imperial Silver Mining Co. v. BarstowNevada Supreme Court · 1869
  2. Reynolds v. HarrisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
  3. Lower v. KnoxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API