Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

1 Wright 568

Price v. Orange

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided May 15, 1834

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1834-05-15

<p>Appeal from justice — high flood — excuse—discretion of court.</p> <p>“Where an appeal is taken from a justice of the peace, the appellant must enter his appeal within the two first days of the next Court of Common Pleas, or he loses the appeal.</p> <p>High flood, or inability to find the - magistrate, do not in law excuse a party from complying with the statute.</p> <p>But if the law allowed the Court of Common Pleas a discretion to receive the appeal or not, a refusal could not be examined into and reversed on error.</p> <p>The provision for an appeal from the justice is analogous to that for appealing to the Supreme Court under the act of 1824.</p>

Decided 1834-05-15

LANE, J.

¶1By the justice’s act (29 O. L. 177) the justice when a case is appealed, is required to make out a transcript of the case, including the recognizance of bail on the appeal, and give it to the *587appellant on demand. The act requires the appellant to enter the appeal on or before the second day of the next term. If he fail, the appellee is authorized to enter it during the term, and have a judgment like that before the justice, or to have the appeal dismissed and remanded to the justice for execution. If neither party enter within the time limited, the law declares the appeal vacated, and requires the justice to proceed on the judgment before him.

¶2The case in the 6 O. 34, decided that an appeal could not be entered after the next term following, but intimates that perhaps the party might be permitted to enter during the term,if prevented from entering the two first days by accident, because for some purposes the term is but one day. This appeal was taken three [570 months before the court, and no excuse whatever is offered for neglecting it till a week before the court. Under such circumstances, we think the application was solely to the discretion of the Common Pleas, which this court cannot control.

¶3The case in this court in 1827, is not analogous. The act under which that appeal was entered (22 O. L. 73), authorized the court after the first day, even on the application of the appellee, to docket the appeal and try the cause.

¶4Order affirmed, with costs.

¶5[Error does not lie to decision on submitted facts by court acting as jury; Bissell v. Couchaine, 15 O. S. 58, 63.]

/1/wright/568 · .json · Public domain