Bailey v. Eastman
This text of 74 N.W. 959 (Bailey v. Eastman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Nebraska Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The papers and documents herein have been filed in this court, in purposed error proceeding, in which there was sought the reversal of the judgment of the district court of Dawes county by which relators’ application for the issuance of a writ of mandamus was denied and dismissed. In what is presumably the journal entry of the [417]*417trial and the resultant adjudication of tbe issues presented there is a statement that a motion for a new trial was filed and passed upon,- but no such pleading appears in the papers filed in this court. Furthermore — and this is of vital importance — the papers filed here are not authenticated by the certificate of the clerk of the trial court, as required by statute, as copies or in whole a transcript of the record of the proceedings in such court. This is a fatal omission; for that there be an authenticated record of the proceedings in the district court filed with a petition in error in the supreme court is jurisdictional, and if lacking, the petition in error will be dismissed. (Otis v. Butters, 46 Neb. 492; Moore v. Waterman, 40 Neb. 498; McDonald v. Grabow, 46 Neb. 406; Union P. R. Co. v. Kinney, 47 Neb. 396; Wachsmuth v. Orient Ins. Co. of Hartford, 49 Neb. 590; Einspahr v. Exchange Nat. Bank of Hastings, 49 Neb. 557.)
Dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 N.W. 959, 54 Neb. 416, 1898 Neb. LEXIS 81, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bailey-v-eastman-neb-1898.