Hodgden v. Comm'rs of Ellsworth Co.

10 Kan. 637
CourtSupreme Court of Kansas
DecidedJanuary 15, 1873
StatusPublished
Cited by17 cases

This text of 10 Kan. 637 (Hodgden v. Comm'rs of Ellsworth Co.) 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
Hodgden v. Comm'rs of Ellsworth Co., 10 Kan. 637 (kan 1873).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Brewer, J.:

On the 24th of July 1872 the judge of the 14th district sitting at chambers dissolved a temporary injunction theretofore granted by him, and on application gave thirty days in which to make a case for this court. A paper purporting to be a case made was prepared and filed in the district clerk’s office within the thirty days. This so-called case was never signed or settled by the judge, but in lieu thereof this stipulation appears at the close:

“This case and exceptions is agreed to be correct.
“S. Atwood, Attorney for Defendants.
“Theodore Sternberg, Attorney for Plaintiffs.”

This paper is not authenticated as required by the statute to constitute it a case made. The signature of the judge is as essential to a case as to a bill of exceptions. • Without such statutory authentication we cannot examine into it. The agreements of counsel cannot make a case, or a bill of exceptions. That can be done only in the manner provided by the code. As was said by the court in Leonard v. Warriner, 20 Wis., 42, “We cannot permit the stipulation of the attorneys to take the place of or do away with the necessity of such signing by the judge. If this practice were allowed attorneys might send up to this court for decision questions never raised in the court below, and even cases to which the attention of the circuit court was never called.” See also The People v. Ferguson, 34 Cal., 310; Cohen v. Trowbridge, 6 Kas., 388, The case will be dismissed.

All the Justices concurring.

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

Related

Abraham v. Roland Oil Co.
1927 OK 386 (Supreme Court of Oklahoma, 1927)
Tucker v. Tucker
154 P. 269 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1916)
Paull v. Paull
74 A. 1016 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1910)
Bradford v. State
1910 OK CR 9 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1910)
Chandler v. State
1909 OK CR 1 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma, 1909)
Crowe v. Corporation of Charles Town
57 S.E. 330 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1907)
In re Norris
57 P. 528 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1899)
Gertz v. Beck
53 P. 884 (Court of Appeals of Kansas, 1898)
Whitzell v. Forgler
30 Kan. 525 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1883)
Ætna Life Insurance v. Koons
26 Kan. 215 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1881)
Allen v. Krueger
25 Kan. 74 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1881)
Parker v. Remington Sewing Machine Co.
24 Kan. 31 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1880)
Karr v. Hudson
19 Kan. 474 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1878)
Shumaker v. O'Brien
19 Kan. 476 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1878)
Atchison & Nebraska Railroad v. Wagner
19 Kan. 335 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1877)
State v. Bohan
19 Kan. 28 (Supreme Court of Kansas, 1877)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 Kan. 637, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hodgden-v-commrs-of-ellsworth-co-kan-1873.