Marsh v. Kinna
Montana Supreme Court
Appeal from Third Distinct, Lewis a/nd Qlandee Comity. This action was dismissed by Wade, J. The affidavit on which the case was dismissed is insufficient. Civ. Pr. Act, § 562. Had the affidavit been sufficient the order was improper. Sts. Ex. Sess. 40, § 1. The order and affidavit may be reviewed on appeal. Civ. Pr. Act, § 377. The affidavit 'was sufficient.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Third Distinct, Lewis a/nd Qlandee Comity. This action was dismissed by Wade, J. The affidavit on which the case was dismissed is insufficient. Civ. Pr. Act, § 562. Had the affidavit been sufficient the order was improper. Sts. Ex. Sess. 40, § 1. The order and affidavit may be reviewed on appeal. Civ. Pr. Act, § 377. The affidavit 'was sufficient. If defective, no objection was made in the court below, and the question cannot be raised in this court for the first time. Morgan v. Hugg, 5 Cal. 409; Oollier v. Oorbett, 15 id. 183 ; McCartney v. Fits Henry, 16 id. 184-
1Opinion of the CourtBlaKE, J.
The respondents filed the following affidavit and motion November 17, 1875, in which one of the respondents deposes “ that he is one of the defendants in the above-entitled action; that he is acquainted with the financial condition of the said plaintiffs; and that, to the best of affiant’s knowledge and belief, said plaintiffs are unable to pay the costs likely to accrue in the said action; wherefore affiant asks that the same may be dismissed.” The court made an order November 19, 1875, that said “ plaintiffs give security for costs in the sum of $300, or justify in said amount before the…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Stevenson v. CadwellMontana Supreme Court · 1894