Kennelly v. Lowery

I concur. However, I think that the nature and importance of the case require a treatment of its *906merits rather than its disposition on account of the oversight of a technicality in the appointment of petitioner. Because the statute whereunder the position was created is new and because a similar situation may recur at any time, it is imperative that the status of the official phonographic court reporter under the new statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 261b, chap. 1031, Stats. 1943) be established by a decision upon the contentions presented by this case.

Prior to October, 1943, petitioner had been…