Murphy v. Ross

Decided March 13, 1891

Washington Supreme Court · decided 1891-03-13

Motion to dismiss the appeal. The appellant, in opposition to the motion, filed the affidavit of Fred T. Peet, the attorney of record in the cause below, as follows: “That on or about the 9th day of July, A. D. 1890, this affiant duly argued a motion for a new trial before Judge Allyn in open court on behalf of said Murphy, appellant; that at that time Judge Allyn notified this affiant that he, Judge Allyn, should be absent from the State of Washington for about sixty days…

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1895

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1891-03-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1The opinion of the court was delivered by

Dunbar, J.

¶2— This is a motion to dismiss an appeal for the reason that appellant has not perfected his appeal within the time prescribed by law and the rules of this court, and affidavits and counter-affidavits are filed in support of and opposed to the motion. We do not think that the affidavit of appellant’s attorney shows any legal or reasonable excuse for the failure. It follows that the motion will be sustained and the appeal dismissed, and it is so ordered.

Anders, C. J., and Scott, Hoyt, and Stiles, JJ., concur.