Legal Opinion

Shissler v. Crooks

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided January 15, 1871PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from iba first judicial district, Nez Perce county.

1Opinion of the Court

Noggle, 0. J.,

delivered the opinion.

Lewis and Whit-son, <JJ., concurred.

In this case a motion is made by the respondent to dismiss the appellant’s appeal, for the reason that no undertaking was filed within the time fixed by section 296 of the civil practice act. Three things must be done by the appellant to perfect an appeal and give the supreme court jurisdiction: 1, A notice of appeal must be filed. 2. A copy of the notice so filed must be served on the adverse party or his attorney, as provided in section 285 of the civil practice act. And 3. The filing of the undertaking required by…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Hastings v. HalleckCalifornia Supreme Court · 1858
  2. Peran v. MonroeNevada Supreme Court · 1865

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Hattabaugh v. VollmerIdaho Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Salt Lake Brewing Co. v. GillmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1886
  3. Oliverson v. AndersonIdaho Supreme Court · 1963
  4. Centro de Detallistas de San Juan v. A. Vicente & Co.Supreme Court of Puerto Rico · 1911

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API