Legal Opinion

Bartels v. Hoey

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided April 15, 1877PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Appeal from, District Court of Pueblo County.

1Opinion of the CourtElbert, J.

This cause was docketed by the appellee, who moves to dismiss it for want of prosecution. Want of jurisdiction is apparent on the face of the record. § 5, R. S. 537, cited by counsel, is not applicable.

An appeal did not lie to this court in this case. A dismissal for want of prosecution would be inapt, as such an order implies prosecution of the suit by the appellant legally possible. The suit must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction, apparent on the face of the record.

Upon the power of the court in such a case to award the defendant costs, there is some conflict in the decisions, but the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Grumon v. RaymondSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1814
  2. Hornthall v. CollectorSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
  3. Mitchell v. KennedyWisconsin Supreme Court · 1853
  4. Williams v. BluntMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1806
  5. Derton v. BoydSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1860

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Harvey v. Travelers Ins.Supreme Court of Colorado · 1893
  2. Kinnear v. FlandersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1891
  3. Clendenning v. GuiseWyoming Supreme Court · 1898

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

Powered by the Exa API