Carter v. Monnastes

Oregon Supreme Court

Carter v. Monnastes

25 P. 29, 19 Or. 538, 1890 Ore. LEXIS 82

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 10, 1890

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 25 P. 29 (Carter v. Monnastes) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. Monnastes, 25 P. 29, 19 Or. 538, 1890 Ore. LEXIS 82 (Or. 1890).

Pincite

Opinion

Strahan, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

But a single question is presented by this appeal, and that is, whether or not the circuit court had power to make the order enlarging the time for filing the transcript. Hill’s Code, § 2125, provides: “On or before the first day of the term of the circuit court next following the allowance of the appeal, the appellant must file with the clerk of such circuit court a transcript of the cause,” etc. The requirement is imperative, and a compliance with the statute was essential to give the circuit court jurisdiction of the cause. No doubt, as appears from the transcript, the appellant was hindered in the prosecution of the appeal by circumstances over which he had no control; and if the circuit court had the power, its order enlarging the time was proper, but no provision of the statute conferring such power has been brought to our notice, and we know of none. 1 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 621.

We think the circuit court did not err in dismissing the appeal, and its judgment must be affirmed.

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

Strahan, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

But a single question is presented by this appeal, and that is, whether or not the circuit court had power to make the order enlarging the time for filing the transcript. Hill’s Code, § 2125, provides: “On or before the first day of the term of the circuit court next following the allowance of the appeal, the appellant must file with the clerk of such circuit court a transcript of the cause,” etc. The requirement is imperative, and a compliance with the statute was essential to give the circuit court jurisdiction of the cause. No doubt, as appears from the transcript, the appellant was hindered in the prosecution of the appeal by circumstances over which he had no control; and if the circuit court had the power, its order enlarging the time was proper, but no provision of the statute conferring such power has been brought to our notice, and we know of none. 1 Am. & Eng. Ency. of Law, 621.

We think the circuit court did not err in dismissing the appeal, and its judgment must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

25 P. 29, 19 Or. 538, 1890 Ore. LEXIS 82, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-monnastes-or-1890.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack