Hiatt v. Kelly

214 P. 66, 66 Mont. 607, 1923 Mont. LEXIS 53
CourtMontana Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 29, 1923
DocketNo. 5,072
StatusPublished

This text of 214 P. 66 (Hiatt v. Kelly) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hiatt v. Kelly, 214 P. 66, 66 Mont. 607, 1923 Mont. LEXIS 53 (Mo. 1923).

Opinion

MR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER LAW

prepared the opinion for the court.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial. On January 11, 1923', nine and one-half months after the transcript had been filed in this court, appellant’s counsel asked and was granted a suspension of the rule requiring the tran script to be printed. An examination of the record be[608]*608fore us, however, discloses that he has made no effort whatever to comply with paragraph 3 of Rule YII (64 Mont. Ixiv, 202 Pac. ix) or subdivision (a) of paragraph 3 of Rule X of this court (Id. lxviii). Such nonobservance of the rules is just and proper reason for a dismissal of the appeal or an affirmance of the order appealed from. (Samuell v. Moore Merc. Co., 62 Mont. 232, 204 Pac. 376; Cobb v. Warren, 64 Mont. 10, 208 Pac. 928; McConnell v. Blackley, ante, p. 510, 214 Pac. 64.)

We therefore recommend that the order appealed from be affirmed.

Per Curiam:

For the reasons given in the foregoing opinion, the order appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Samuell v. Moore Mercantile Co.
204 P. 376 (Montana Supreme Court, 1922)
Cobb v. Warren
208 P. 928 (Montana Supreme Court, 1922)
McConnell v. Blackley
214 P. 64 (Montana Supreme Court, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
214 P. 66, 66 Mont. 607, 1923 Mont. LEXIS 53, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hiatt-v-kelly-mont-1923.