Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

21 S.D. 180

Kierbow v. Young

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided December 19, 1906

South Dakota Supreme Court · decided 1906-12-19

Hon. Coring E. Garry, Judge. Action by D. O. Kierbow against Henry Young, as sheriff of McPherson county. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. This cause was tried to the court without a jury. Under these circumstances it was necessary, before entry of judgment, for the court to give his decision in writing and that the same be filed with the clerk.

Relies on Thomas v. Issenhuth

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Reversed · Decided 1906-12-19

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently May 1994

5 state decisions

201906191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 →

FULLER, P. J.

¶1By stipulation of counsel, this action to recover possession of $63, as exempt property which the defendant sheriff had seized under an attachment, was tried to the court without a jury, and this appeal is from a judgment in favor of plaintiff for the full amount claimed and from an order overruling defendant’s motion for a new trial. ■

¶2The objection that judgment was rendered and entered without findings upon any of the issues of fact raised by the pleadings, under which testimony was offered by the respective parties, is presented by an assignment of error which must control the determination of this appeal. The mandatory direction of the statute applicable to this case 'is that the decision of the court must be given in writing within a specified time and be. filed with the clerk, and that: “No judgment shall be rendered or entered until after the filing of such decision. In giving the decision, the facts found and the conclusions must be separately stated. Judgment upon the decision must be entered accordingly.” Sections 276, 277, Rev. Code Civ. Proc. Having failed to find any of the ultimate facts material to the issues presented for determination, there is nothing upon which to base a judgment, and the fact that there was no> request for express findings in no manner obviates the necessity of complying with the above positive and explicit requirement. Gull River Dumber Company v. School District No. 39, 1 N. D. 500, 48 N. W. 427.

¶3Adhering to the rule announced in Thomas v. Issenhuth, 18 S. D. 303, 100 N. W. 436, the judgment appealed from is reversed, and a new trial ordered.

CORSON, J., not sitting.
/21/sd/180 · .json · Public domain