Honnold v. Stark-Weather

Idaho Supreme Court

Honnold v. Stark-Weather

230 P. 40, 39 Idaho 727

DecidedOctober 21, 1924

StatusPublished

This text of 230 P. 40 (Honnold v. Stark-Weather) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Idaho Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Honnold v. Stark-Weather, 230 P. 40, 39 Idaho 727 (Idaho 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

WILLIAM A. LEE, J.

Respondent brought an action to recover on a promissory note executed to her by appellant. The cause was tried to the court with a jury, and both sides having offered evidence and rested, upon motion of respondent the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for respondent. From the judgment entered on such verdict so returned this appeal was taken.

When the cause was reached for hearing in this court only counsel for respondent made an appearance, no briefs *728 having been filed, and made a motion to dismiss the appeal, advising the court that since the appeal was taken the appellant has died. Rule 48 of this court provides in part that when a cause is reached on the calendar and only respondent is represented by counsel and neither side has submitted a brief, upon motion of respondent the judgment, order or proceeding of the court below will be affirmed of course and without argument, or the court may examine the record and render judgment on the merits. (Hecker v. Johnson, 36 Ida. 417, 211 Pac. 445.) We have examined the record and find no fundamental error therein; the ■judgment is affirmed with costs to respondent.

McCarthy, C. J., and Budge, Dunn and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

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

WILLIAM A. LEE, J.

Respondent brought an action to recover on a promissory note executed to her by appellant. The cause was tried to the court with a jury, and both sides having offered evidence and rested, upon motion of respondent the court instructed the jury to return a verdict for respondent. From the judgment entered on such verdict so returned this appeal was taken.

When the cause was reached for hearing in this court only counsel for respondent made an appearance, no briefs *728 having been filed, and made a motion to dismiss the appeal, advising the court that since the appeal was taken the appellant has died. Rule 48 of this court provides in part that when a cause is reached on the calendar and only respondent is represented by counsel and neither side has submitted a brief, upon motion of respondent the judgment, order or proceeding of the court below will be affirmed of course and without argument, or the court may examine the record and render judgment on the merits. (Hecker v. Johnson, 36 Ida. 417, 211 Pac. 445.) We have examined the record and find no fundamental error therein; the ■judgment is affirmed with costs to respondent.

McCarthy, C. J., and Budge, Dunn and Wm. E. Lee, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

230 P. 40, 39 Idaho 727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/honnold-v-stark-weather-idaho-1924.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack