Thum v. Bailey
Idaho Supreme Court
APPEAL from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District for Elmore County. Hon. Lyttleton Price, Judge. Action to determine the ownership of mining claims. Judgment for the plaintiff. No sufficient undertaking on appeal was filed in this cause, upon the appeal from the judgment or from the order overruling the motion for new trial, the undertaking filed being fatally ambiguous.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District for Elmore County. Hon. Lyttleton Price, Judge. Action to determine the ownership of mining claims. Judgment for the plaintiff. No sufficient undertaking on appeal was filed in this cause, upon the appeal from the judgment or from the order overruling the motion for new trial, the undertaking filed being fatally ambiguous. (Baker v. Railway Co., 8 Idaho, 361, 66 Pac. 806; Wallace v. McKinley, 6 Idaho, 95, 53 Pac. 104; Kelly v. Leachman, 5 Idaho, 521, 51 Pac. 407, and cases cited.)
1Opinion of the CourtSullivan, J.
This is an appeal from the judgment and the order denying a new trial. Counsel for respondent has made a motion to strike out part of the transcript and also a motion to dismiss the appeal on two grounds. In our view of the matter it will be necessary for a determination of the case to decide one of the points raised by the motions, and that is the sufficiency of the undertaking on the appeals, one ap*511peal being from tbe judgment and one from the order denying a new trial.
In the preamble of the undertaking is recited the fact that the appeals are from the judgment and the order overruling the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Motherwell v. TaylorIdaho Supreme Court · 1886
- Synnott v. ShaughnessyIdaho Supreme Court · 1885
- Kelly v. LeachmanIdaho Supreme Court · 1897
- Baker v. Oregon Railroad & NavigationIdaho Supreme Court · 1901