Baldwin v. Rogers
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Order to show cause why an order, entered by the clerk of this court, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 86, § 21, dismissing the appeal in this action, should not be vacated, and Anna E. Baldwin, administratrix' of the respondent, M. A. Baldwin, deceased, substituted as respondent.
Read the full summary
Order to show cause why an order, entered by the clerk of this court, under Gen. St. 1878, c. 86, § 21, dismissing the appeal in this action, should not be vacated, and Anna E. Baldwin, administratrix' of the respondent, M. A. Baldwin, deceased, substituted as respondent. The return on the appeal of defendant Bogers was filed on February 14,1881. On February 23,1881, the respondent, M. A. Baldwin, died, and on May 3,1881, on the affidavit of Anna E. Baldwin, showing the death of respondent, her appointment as his administratrix and that sixty days had elapsed since his death, and that…
1Opinion of the CourtGilfillan, C. J.
Motion to reinstate an appeal, dismissed under Gen. St. 1878, c. 86, § 21, for the reason that, the respondent having died, the appellant failed, for sixty days after the death, to cause the legal representative of respondent to be substituted as respondent. It is claimed that we have no power to relieve a party in such a case; that the statute is imperative and inflexible. The provision is to be regarded as a rule of practice for the conduct of appeals. As such we have the same control over it as over any other statutory rule of practice. As to all other matters of practice, the power given…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Macknick v. Switchmen's UnionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- In re Judicial Ditch No. 52Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
- Moe v. GoodroadSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1922