Oliver Typewriter Co. v. Burtner

New Mexico Supreme Court

Oliver Typewriter Co. v. Burtner

17 N.M. 354

CourtNew Mexico Supreme Court

DecidedNovember 7, 1912

DocketNo. 1484

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 N.M. 354 (Oliver Typewriter Co. v. Burtner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Mexico Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Oliver Typewriter Co. v. Burtner, 17 N.M. 354 (N.M. 1912).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OP THE COURT.

The appellants bring this appeal, from a judgment of ■the District Court of Bernalillo County, wherein judgment was rendered against them for the sum of $6.65, and assign nine grounds of error, all based upon alleged error occurring upon the trial of the cause and conclusions of the lower court upon the evidence. Unfortunately for the appellants, and much to the relief of the court, for we are not inclined to encourage appeals to this court, where so small ■an amount is involved, the transcript of the testimony is not certified to and signed by the judge who tried the case, and is not brought into the record by bill of exceptions.

1 12 Sec. 24 of Chap. 57, S. L. 1907, provides that the testimony may become a part of the record without a -bill of exceptions, in cases tried without a jury. “When properly certified by the court or referee,” and unless such testimony is properly certified it may not be considered in the review of the case. Street v. Smith, 15 N. M. 95. The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

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

OPINION OP THE COURT.

The appellants bring this appeal, from a judgment of ■the District Court of Bernalillo County, wherein judgment was rendered against them for the sum of $6.65, and assign nine grounds of error, all based upon alleged error occurring upon the trial of the cause and conclusions of the lower court upon the evidence. Unfortunately for the appellants, and much to the relief of the court, for we are not inclined to encourage appeals to this court, where so small ■an amount is involved, the transcript of the testimony is not certified to and signed by the judge who tried the case, and is not brought into the record by bill of exceptions.

1 12 Sec. 24 of Chap. 57, S. L. 1907, provides that the testimony may become a part of the record without a -bill of exceptions, in cases tried without a jury. “When properly certified by the court or referee,” and unless such testimony is properly certified it may not be considered in the review of the case. Street v. Smith, 15 N. M. 95. The judgment of the lower court is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 N.M. 354, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oliver-typewriter-co-v-burtner-nm-1912.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack