Haas v. Teters
SAM HAAS v. A. R. TETERS
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
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
SULLIVAN, C. J.
— Respondent moves to dismiss tbe appeal on tbe ground, among other things, that the undertaking was not filed within five days after the notice of appeal was served on the attorney for the adverse party, as provided by sec. 4808, Rev. Codes.
It appears from the record that the notice of appeal was served on the 12th day of'October, 1909, and the undertaking was not filed with the clerk of the proper court until the the 22d day of October, 1909, making ten days between the service of the notice of appeal and the filing of the undertaking. Under the provisions of said section of the statute, the undertaking must be filed within five days after the notice of appeal is served upon the adverse party or his attorney, or the appeal is ineffectual for any purpose. As the undertaking was not filed until ten days after the notice of appeal was served, the motion must be granted, and it is so ordered. (Cole v. Fox, 13 Ida. 123 , 88 Pac. 561 ; West v. Dygert, 13 Ida. 641 , 92 Pac. 753 ; Village of Hailey v. Riley, 13 Ida. 749 , 92 Pac. 756 .)
Costs are awarded to respondent.
Stewart and Ailshie, JJ., concur.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 4 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.