Smith v. Conlan
Smith and Others v. Conlan
Headnotes
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.
Hanna, J.
To the assignment of errors in this case, the appellee answered, first, in the form of a joinder in error; and, second, that the appeal was not taken within three years from the rendition of judgment, &c.
There was no reply to this answer.
Two points are made by the appellants upon this second answer—
1. That the appellee having joined in error, is concluded by that act from setting up the matter attempted to be pleaded in the second answer.
2. If not, then the appellee waived any benefit of said second answer, by not taking a rule against, and requiring a reply from, the appellants thereto.
We cannot concur in this view of the question of practice. The appellee waived the joinder in error by filing the second paragraph of the answer to the assignment of error. Ind. Dig., p. 649. The appellants having submitted the case without replying to or controverting the matters set up in the second paragraph of the answer, perhaps, admitted the truth thereof; but whether that was the effect or not, it appears, prima facie, to be the fact, from an inspection of the record and the indorsement thereon, of the time of filing, that the answer is true, that more than three years had elapsed. This Court, therefore, has no jurisdiction.
Per Curiam.
The appeal is dismissed with costs.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 1 case
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.