Roudebush v. Ray

Montana Supreme Court

Roudebush v. Ray

3 Mont. 188

DecidedJanuary 15, 1878

StatusPublished

This text of 3 Mont. 188 (Roudebush v. Ray) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Roudebush v. Ray, 3 Mont. 188 (Mo. 1878).

Pincite

Opinion

Knowles, J.

The judgment in this case was rendered at an adjourned term of court. During the interval of adjournment a term of court was held in the same district in another county by the same judge. The only error assigned is, that this judgment was void because the term of court for Lewis and Clarke county terminated at the commencement of the term in Meagher county, and hence was riot rendered in term time. This point has been considered in the case of Higley v. Gilmer et al., at this term, and it was therein determined that such judgment was rendered in term time and valid.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed with costs.

Judgment affirmed.

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

Knowles, J.

The judgment in this case was rendered at an adjourned term of court. During the interval of adjournment a term of court was held in the same district in another county by the same judge. The only error assigned is, that this judgment was void because the term of court for Lewis and Clarke county terminated at the commencement of the term in Meagher county, and hence was riot rendered in term time. This point has been considered in the case of Higley v. Gilmer et al., at this term, and it was therein determined that such judgment was rendered in term time and valid.

The judgment of the court below is affirmed with costs.

Judgment affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

3 Mont. 188, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roudebush-v-ray-mont-1878.