Baker v. Drews
This text of 74 P. 1130 (Baker v. Drews) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This is a motion to dismiss the appeal on Ithe ground that the notice of appeal was not served on the respondent Carl Drews. It appears from the record that Drews was served with summons and failed to appear and answer. Judgment was entered in favor of said respondent and defendants. An appeal was taken by the plaintiff and notice of appeal was not served on Drews. As it is clearly apparent from the record that Drews would be affected by a modification or reversal of the judgment, on the authority of Titiman et al., v. Alamance Min. Co., ante, p. 240, 74 Pac. 529, [277]*277the motion must be sustained and the appeal dismissed, and fit is so ordered, with costs of appeal in favor of defendants Gowanlocks.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
74 P. 1130, 9 Idaho 276, 1903 Ida. LEXIS 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/baker-v-drews-idaho-1903.