TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Elliott v. Retail Hardware Mutual Fire Insurance

R. J. Elliott v. Retail Hardware Mutual Fire Insurance Company of Minnesota. [Fn1]

Elliott v. Retail Hardware Mut. Fire Ins., 233 N.W. 316 (Minn. 1930)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of Minnesota · State Highest Courts
Decided
November 28, 1930
Docket
No. 28,213.
Judges
PER CURIAM.
Citations
233 N.W. 316181 Minn. 5731930 Minn. LEXIS 1036

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff appeals from an order denying a new trial. The findings and order for judgment were made July 29, 1926. Plaintiff’s motion for amended findings or new trial was denied by an order of August 27,1927. That year of delay was but a beginning. Notice of the filing of the order was given and service admitted September 7, 1927. The notice, with the proof of service, was not part of the record when the case came here. It has since been produced in response to our request and filed. Notwithstanding the service of notice of the order denying the motion for new trial, September 7, 1927, the notice of appeal therefrom was not served until June 26, 1930.

In order to be effective for any purpose such a notice must be served and filed within 30 days from the notice by the adverse party of the filing of the order appealed from. G. S. 1923 ( 2 Mason, 1927 ) §§ 9492, 9497. Counsel for defendant has been so accommodating as not to question our jurisdiction, but that does not help *574 plaintiff. The jurisdiction of this court on appeal does not rest upon the consent of counsel or litigants. If it does not exist otherwise, no amount of accommodation on their part can create it. The appeal must be dismissed.

The printed record should show jurisdiction plainly and affirmatively. In this case the notice of appeal was not printed, nor is there in the printed record any reference to its date. There is only the misleading statement that one was “duly served and filed as provided by statute.”

Appeal dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1932: 11950: 11952: 11956: 11963: 11972: 119322026peak 1932 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Sax42 N.W.2d 680 (Minn. 1950)
  2. Reub's Minot Camera, Inc. v. General Electric Credit Corp.201 N.W.2d 877 (N.D. 1972)
  3. CONDEMNATION BY OAK CENTER CREAMERY CO. v. Grobe119 N.W.2d 729 (Minn. 1963)
  4. State ex rel. Farrington v. Rigg78 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. 1956)
  5. Backstrom v. New York Life Insurance Co.244 N.W. 64 (Minn. 1932)
  6. Ullman v. Lutz55 N.W.2d 57 (Minn. 1952)

Most recent

  1. Reub's Minot Camera, Inc. v. General Electric Credit Corp.201 N.W.2d 877 (N.D. 1972)
  2. CONDEMNATION BY OAK CENTER CREAMERY CO. v. Grobe119 N.W.2d 729 (Minn. 1963)
  3. State ex rel. Farrington v. Rigg78 N.W.2d 721 (Minn. 1956)
  4. Ullman v. Lutz55 N.W.2d 57 (Minn. 1952)
  5. State v. Sax42 N.W.2d 680 (Minn. 1950)
  6. Backstrom v. New York Life Insurance Co.244 N.W. 64 (Minn. 1932)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list