Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Ind. 263

Conoway v. Weaver

Indiana Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1849

Indiana Supreme Court · decided 1849-01-12

<p>The statements by the clerk disclosing the grounds upon which the Court acted in dismissing an appeal, form no part of the record, and cannot be regarded.</p> <p>The dismission of a cause by the Circuit Court, on motion, without any reason in favor of or against the dismission appearing in the bill of exceptions, must be presumed to be correct.</p>

Relies on Blaney v. Findley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1849-01-12

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently April 1902

11 state decisions

601849185018601870188018901900decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Smith, J. —

¶1This was an appeal to the Circuit Court from the decision of the board of township trustees of Union township, Ohio county, to whom jurisdiction had been given by a local law, upon an application for a review and relocation of part of a county road running through land belonging to Conoway.

¶2In that part of the record before us, purporting to contain the minutes of the proceedings in the Circuit Court, it is stated that, on the 16th of February, 1848, the parties appeared, and the defendant moved the Court to dismiss the appeal, and, by the agreement of the parties, the cause was laid over until the next Tuesday. Afterwards, on the 21st of February, the parties came, and the defendant moved the Court to dismiss the appeal on account of the insufficiency of the appeal-bond, which motion was overruled; and, on the next day, the defendant moved the Court to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the transcript of the proceedings of the trustees was not filed in the clerk’s office within twenty days from the time *264of taking the appeal, which motion the Court sustained. A judgment was then rendered for the costs, and thereupon the plaintiff prayed an appeal to the Supreme Court, which was granted.

D. S. Major and A. Browrer, for the appellant.

¶3These statements by the clerk, so far, at least, as they purport to disclose the grounds upon which the Court acted in dismissing the appeal, are not legitimately a part of the record, and cannot be regarded. Blany v. Findlay, 2 Blackf. 338.—Wilson v. Coles, 2 id. 402.—Ross v. Misner, 3 id. 362.—Richardson v. St. Joseph's Iron Co., 5 id. 146. We are, therefore, only informed that the Circuit Court dismissed the appeal, and as there is no bill of exceptions showing the reasons of the Court for so doing, they must be presumed to have been sufficient.

Per Curiam.

¶4The judgment is affirmed with costs, &c.

/1/ind/263 · .json · Public domain