Indiana State Board of Dental Examiners v. Fetrow

119 N.E. 1004, 68 Ind. App. 189, 1918 Ind. App. LEXIS 63
CourtIndiana Court of Appeals
DecidedJune 27, 1918
DocketNo. 9,978
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 119 N.E. 1004 (Indiana State Board of Dental Examiners v. Fetrow) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Indiana Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Indiana State Board of Dental Examiners v. Fetrow, 119 N.E. 1004, 68 Ind. App. 189, 1918 Ind. App. LEXIS 63 (Ind. Ct. App. 1918).

Opinion

Ibach, J.

On December 11, 1914, appellee, being a resident of Miami county, filed bis appeal in the circuit court of that county under §6106 Burns 1914, Acts 1913 p. 340, §3, asking that tbe appellant board be required to sbow cause why a certificate entitling bim to practice dentistry in this state should not be issued.

Tbe record disclosed that a purported notice of sucb appeal was issued to tbe sheriff of Monroe county, Indiana, directing bim to serve tbe same upon Fred J. Prow, secretary and treasurer of tbe appellant board, which was done, as shown by tbe return of sucb sheriff on December 16,1914. On January 16, 1915, appellant board was defaulted and a decree rendered directing tbe clerk of tbe court to issue to appellee a license to practice dentistry ip this state upon tbe payment of tbe requisite fee. On February 8, 1915, at tbe same term of court, appellant, represented by tbe Attorney-General, filed its motion, together with bis affidavit in support of tbe same, [191]*191praying that the default and judgment be set aside. This motion was overruled and an exception saved.

It is clearly apparent from the record that this is an attempted appeal from the ruling of the court in overruling the motion to set aside the default.

Appellee has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal upon the ground that the order appealed from is not a final judgment, and that there is no attempt to appeal from the judgment on default. Furthermore, that if it is an attempted appeal from the judgment on default, it is not brought within time. Kurtz v. Phillips (1916), 63 Ind. App. 79, 113 N. E. 1016.

1. 2. It appears from the record that while the motion to set aside the judgment by default was filed at the term at which the judgment was rendered, such motion was not ruled on until October 4, 1915, and more than 180 days after the judgment on default was rendered. A motion to set aside a default, unlike a motion for a new trial, does not have the effect of extending the time for the taking of an appeal. Thomas v. Thomas (1916), 61 Ind. App. 101, 110 N. E. 573, and cases cited; Treloar v. Harris (1917), 65 Ind. App. 22, 116 N. E. 590. It necessarily follows that án attempted appeal from the judgment on default would be without force, and, as under the case of Kurtz v. Phillips, supra, an appeal will not lie from the ruling on the motion to set aside a default, the questions sought to be presented cannot be considered. Appeal dismissed. Dausman, J. dissenting.

Note. — Reported in 119 N. E. 1004.

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

Related

Ayrshire Coal Co. v. Thurman
127 N.E. 810 (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1920)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
119 N.E. 1004, 68 Ind. App. 189, 1918 Ind. App. LEXIS 63, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/indiana-state-board-of-dental-examiners-v-fetrow-indctapp-1918.