Byers v. Leavenworth Lodge No. 2

54 Kan. 321
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJuly 15, 1894
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 54 Kan. 321 (Byers v. Leavenworth Lodge No. 2) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Byers v. Leavenworth Lodge No. 2, 54 Kan. 321 (kan 1894).

Opinion

Per Curiam:

A motion has been filed in this ease to dismiss the petition in error, upon the ground that there is not attached and filed with the petition any case-made, or a certified transcript of the record of the trial court, and also because it is apparent from the record that it is not a full and complete transcript. (Civil Code, § 546a.) The case purports to come here upon a transcript, and not a case-made. “To secure a review upon a transcript, the certificate of the clerk attached to the record should show that it is full and complete, and, failing in this respect, the present proceedings must be dismissed.” (Neiswender v. James, 41 Kas. 463; Comm’rs of Elk Co. v. Scott, 51 id. 139; Westerbrook v. Schmaus, 51 id. 214.) The clerk could have certified, if such were the case, in two or three lines, that the transcript to which he attached his name was “a true, full and complete transcript of the proceedings in the case, as the same appears of record in my office.” He did not do this. Instead thereof, he certified “that the transcript contained a true, full and complete copies” of certain pleadings, motions, entries, etc. His certificate does not show that these were all the records and proceedings that should have been certified to this court in the transcript.

“We are not disposed to discourage brevity in the making of records for review, as it is a much-needed reform. It may be accomplished by means of the case-made; but when a review is based on a transcript, it must contain the complete record,” (Neiswender v. James, supra.)

The motion will be sustained, and the case dismissed.

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

Related

Walcher v. Stone
1905 OK 5 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1905)
Featherman v. Granite County
72 P. 972 (Montana Supreme Court, 1903)
Bank of Santa Fe ex rel. Coffman v. Hussey
50 P. 977 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
54 Kan. 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/byers-v-leavenworth-lodge-no-2-kan-1894.