Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

37 Ind. App. 104

Hayes v. Locus

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided January 9, 1906

Indiana Court of Appeals · decided 1906-01-09

<p>Appeal and Erroe. — Assignment of Errors. — Motion to Dismiss Appeal. — Waiver.—Where the error assigned is, that the trial ■ court erred in sustaining defendants’ demurrer and rendering judgment, no question is presented; and the fact that an appellee failed to move to dismiss such appeal until after the expiration of the time for filing its brief is not a waiver of its right to a dismissal.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1914

1 state decisions

Relies on Spitzer v. Miller

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Appeal dismissed · Decided 1906-01-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1This appeal having been dismissed, upon the motion of the appellants, as to all the appellees except the Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Company, a motion to dismiss the appeal has been presented by that company. In the assignment of errors the specifications are like those which we held to be not sufficient to present any question in Spitzer v. Miller (1905), 35 Ind. App. 116. It is claimed on behalf of the appellants that this motion of the solé remaining appellee to dismiss comes too late, inasmuch as a long period has elapsed since the submission of the cause in this court, and after the time for the filing of a brief for such appellee on the merits; but, the assignment of errors being so defective as not to present any question upon the merits, the appeal upon final hearing would be dismissed by the court without any motion therefor. Therefore there has been no waiver of the right of such appellee to the dismissal.

¶2Appeal dismissed.

/37/indapp/104 · .json · Public domain