Golden v. McKim
Nevada Supreme Court
Application for order directing clerk to issue duplicate original remittitur or a new remittitur nunc pro tunc. (Sanders, C. J., not participating.) The issuing of a remittitur does not divest the supreme court of jurisdiction of the cause. It must be delivered to the clerk of the lower court, by him received for filing, and it must be regularly filed and entered in the record book of his office.
Read the full summary
Application for order directing clerk to issue duplicate original remittitur or a new remittitur nunc pro tunc. (Sanders, C. J., not participating.) The issuing of a remittitur does not divest the supreme court of jurisdiction of the cause. It must be delivered to the clerk of the lower court, by him received for filing, and it must be regularly filed and entered in the record book of his office. The lower court does not reacquire jurisdiction of the cause until the remittitur has been regularly filed and entered in the court records. Burkle v. Luce, 1 N. Y. 239; Martin v. Wilson, 1 N. Y.…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Court,
Coleman, J.:
This is an application for an order directing the clerk of this court to issue “a duplicate original remittitur or a new remittitur, nunc pro tunc.” The application is based upon the ground that the original remittitur has been lost, and cannot be found among the records and files of the trial court, and for the further reason that it was never filed with the clerk of said court.
The files of this court show that a remittitur issued herein on the 14th day of April, 1916; that the clerk mailed the same to the clerk of the trial court, and *352thereafter received a receipt…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Carroll v. Centralia Water Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1893
- President & Directors of the Manhattan Co v. LaimbeerNew York Court of Appeals · 1888
- Beebe v. MorrellMichigan Supreme Court · 1889
- Hilts v. HiltsOregon Supreme Court · 1903
- Hook v. FennerSupreme Court of Colorado · 1893
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dwight v. HazlettWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1929
- Estate of Switzer v. StreetSupreme Court of Florida · 1934
- Black United Front v. Washington Metropolitan Area Transit CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1970
- Canepa v. DurhamNevada Supreme Court · 1944
- City of Fallon v. Churchill County Bank Mortgage Corp.Nevada Supreme Court · 1935
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.