Canyon Road Co. v. Lawrence
Oregon Supreme Court
Appeal from Douglas County. A motion was made in tins case to dismiss the appeal, for the reason that the said appeal has not been perfected, since there was no undertaking filed, as was required bylaw; and a cross application to file an undertaking, supported by affidavit, is also made.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Douglas County. A motion was made in tins case to dismiss the appeal, for the reason that the said appeal has not been perfected, since there was no undertaking filed, as was required bylaw; and a cross application to file an undertaking, supported by affidavit, is also made. The record discloses these facts: the notice of appeal and the accompanying certificate of errors was filed August 17, 1870, and service acknowledged on the same day, and the undertaking was filed Sept. 3, 1870, that is, a greater period of time than ten days elapsed between the service of the notice of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcArthur, J.
It is unnecessary to refer directly to the facts 'in the affidavit. Sec. 527 of the code of civil procedure, prescribes the manner in which appeals shall be taken and perfected. Subdivision two of that section provides, that within ten days from the service of the notice of appeal, the appellant shall file with the clerk the required statutory undertaking. We are of opinion that the provisions of the statute in regard to the time within which the undertaking on appeal is required to be filed, should in all cases be strictly complied with. Tbe true construction of subdivision 2 of section 527…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Elliott v. ChapmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1860
3Cited by4 opinions
- Freas v. EngelbrechtSupreme Court of Colorado · 1877
- Odell v. GotfreyOregon Supreme Court · 1886
- Guernsey County v. CambridgeGuernsey Circuit Court · 1892
- Laub v. Warren Guarantee Title & Mortgage Co.Trumbull County Court of Common Pleas · 1933