Nevada Central Railroad v. District Court
Nevada Supreme Court
Application for a writ of prohibition. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The district court never had any jurisdiction in the matter by appeal, but if the dismissal was erroneous it was an excess of jurisdiction and either a writ of certiorari or mandamus was the proper remedy for plaintiff to employ. II. An appeal from a justice’s court will not lie until a case has been tried upon its merits.
Read the full summary
Application for a writ of prohibition. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The district court never had any jurisdiction in the matter by appeal, but if the dismissal was erroneous it was an excess of jurisdiction and either a writ of certiorari or mandamus was the proper remedy for plaintiff to employ. II. An appeal from a justice’s court will not lie until a case has been tried upon its merits. (Martin v. District Court, 13 Nev. 91.) I. The appeal to the district court was properly taken. Issues had been joined in the justice’s court. The justice had dismissed the action and an…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Bigelow, J.:
In the action of J. F. Dennis v. The Nevada Central Railroad, Company, pending in the justice’s court of Austin township, Lander county, the justice being of the opinion that he had lost jurisdiction of the case by reason of having granted, although by consent of both parties, a continuance for more than ten days without requiring the undertaking provided for in Gen. Stat., Sec. 3565, dismissed it, and rendered judgment against the plaintiff for costs. It is sufficient upon this point to say that this was error, because when both parties consent to an adjournment of…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bowie v. City of KansasSupreme Court of Missouri · 1873
- Dowling v. PolackCalifornia Supreme Court · 1861
- People ex rel. Jones v. Cty. Court of El DoradoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
- State ex rel. Treadway v. WrightNevada Supreme Court · 1868
- Zoller v. McDonaldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1863
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Office Specialty Manufacturing Co. v. CurlerNevada Supreme Court · 1902
- In re BreckenridgeNevada Supreme Court · 1911
- Speckert v. RayCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1915
- Andrews v. CookNevada Supreme Court · 1905
- Chapman v. Justice Court of Tonopah TownshipNevada Supreme Court · 1906