King v. Pool
Syllabus
Summary
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The order overruling the motion for a new trial in this cause was made and entered on March 29, 1915. The record before us fails to disclose that an extension of the time for serving case-made was made by the trial court until May 26, 1915. As the case-made was not served within the time allowed by statute (Rev. Laws 1910, sec. 5242), nor did the trial court attempt to extend the time for such service before the expiration of the statutory period, nor is the record certified as a transcript, it follows that the motion to dismiss the appeal must be sustained.
It is so ordered.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 2 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Most recent
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.