Bedford v. Gem Irrigation District

4 P.2d 366, 51 Idaho 105, 1931 Ida. LEXIS 120
Idaho Supreme Court·Decided September 26, 1931·No. No. 5705.·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

GIVENS, J.

Respondent seeks diminution of the record to supply an agreement made between the parties subsequent to the trial, appeal and preparation of the transcript, which agreement respondent contends has disposed of one of the issues on appeal, rendering the same moot.

Diminution of the record is to supply something omitted which should have been in the transcript, or correct an error, not to supply new matter which could, or should not have been in the transcript. (Newby v. City of St. Anthony, 48 Ida. 608, 284 Pac. 1028; Rule 29, Supreme Court, in effect Aug. 25, 1926.)

If an issue in an appeal has become moot since the appeal was taken, the proper procedure is to move to dismiss, and upon such motion the court may consider evidence outside the original record. (Abels v. Turner Trust Co., 31 Ida. 777, 176 Pac. 884.)

Motion for diminution of the record denied.

Budge, Yarian and McNaughton, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bedford v. Gem Irrigation District, 4 P.2d 366, 51 Idaho 105, 1931 Ida. LEXIS 120 (Idaho 1931).

4 P.2d 366 (Bedford v. Gem Irrigation District) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

England v. Phillips
537 P.2d 1019 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1975)
Boyer v. Shoshone-Bannock Indian Tribes
441 P.2d 167 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1968)
Dorman v. Young
332 P.2d 480 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1958)
Guiles v. Kellar
195 P.2d 367 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1948)
Henderson v. Nixon
168 P.2d 594 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1945)
Owen v. Taylor Ex Rel. Taylor
114 P.2d 258 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1941)