Close v. Close

Oregon Supreme Court

Close v. Close

42 P. 128, 28 Or. 108, 1895 Ore. LEXIS 98

CourtOregon Supreme Court

DecidedOctober 28, 1895

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 42 P. 128 (Close v. Close) 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

Close v. Close, 42 P. 128, 28 Or. 108, 1895 Ore. LEXIS 98 (Or. 1895).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal because the abstract of the record required by the rules of this court has not been served or filed. The defendant undertakés to excuse his failure in this regard on the ground that the evidence taken in the court below and upon which the decree was based has been lost or misplaced. There is no rule requiring the evidence to be printed in the abstract, and, besides, it is the duty of the appellant to bring into this court a perfect record, and if any part thereof has been lost or mislaid it must be supplied in the court below, and if not so supplied within a reasonable time the appeal will be dismissed: Wolf v. Smith, 6 Or. 74; Buckman v. Whitney, 28 Cal. 555; Boyd v. Burrell, 60 Cal. 280. The transcript was filed on March fifth, eighteen hundred and ninety-five, and the lost record has not been supplied, nor has there been any effort made in that direction so far as we have been advised. The appeal must therefore be dismissed, and it is so ordered. Dismissed.

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

Per Curiam.

This is a motion to dismiss the appeal because the abstract of the record required by the rules of this court has not been served or filed. The defendant undertakés to excuse his failure in this regard on the ground that the evidence taken in the court below and upon which the decree was based has been lost or misplaced. There is no rule requiring the evidence to be printed in the abstract, and, besides, it is the duty of the appellant to bring into this court a perfect record, and if any part thereof has been lost or mislaid it must be supplied in the court below, and if not so supplied within a reasonable time the appeal will be dismissed: Wolf v. Smith, 6 Or. 74; Buckman v. Whitney, 28 Cal. 555; Boyd v. Burrell, 60 Cal. 280. The transcript was filed on March fifth, eighteen hundred and ninety-five, and the lost record has not been supplied, nor has there been any effort made in that direction so far as we have been advised. The appeal must therefore be dismissed, and it is so ordered. Dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 P. 128, 28 Or. 108, 1895 Ore. LEXIS 98, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/close-v-close-or-1895.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack