Merrill v. Dearing
This text of 24 Minn. 179 (Merrill v. Dearing) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Motion to affirm judgment under rules 11 and 14. In opposition, appellant shows a notice dismissing [180]*180the appeal served upon the respondent and filed, with proof of service, with the clerk.
There is no statute or rule of court controlling the practice in relation to the dismissal or withdrawal of appeals to this court. Where there is no such statute ór rule of court we think that, if an appellate court has once got jurisdiction of a cause, it cannot be deprived of that jurisdiction, and the respondent of a decision, at the mere will of the appellant. He should make application to the court for leave to dismiss. A mere notice that he dismisses is a nullity. Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
24 Minn. 179, 1877 Minn. LEXIS 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merrill-v-dearing-minn-1877.