Krueger-Ihle Electric Co. v. Petring Motor Co.
Krueger-Ihle Electric Co. v. Petring Motor Co.
Opinion of the Court
Oral argument on motion of the appellee P'etring Motor Company to dismiss the appellant’s appeal for failure to timely file briefs as required by rules of this court was heard on March 5, 1973.
The record discloses original brief day was December 14, 1972; the bill of exceptions was filed in the District Court on November 3, 1972; and a supplement thereto was filed on December 27, 1972.
As grounds for the last-requested extension the appellant avers that a portion of the bill of exceptions pertaining to a motion heard by the trial court on August 4, 1972, was omitted therefrom. The praecipe for the bill of exceptions was as follows: “Please include therein a complete bill of exceptions, all evidence offered at the hearing on the motion for summary judgment on June 16, 1972 and on the 23rd day of January, 1970.”
The affidavit in support of the motion indicates that the sole omitted portion was an exhibit offered, but not received by the trial court, at a hearing on August 4, 1972. We interpret the praecipe as not including a request for that inclusion. In any event, the omission was known, or could have been known by the exercise of reasonable diligence, before the second extension was requested. It further appears that the brief could have been prepared timely and the bill of exceptions later supplemented. The record does not show that good cause existed for the requested extension.
Appeal dismissed.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
The appellant’s brief has been on file since March 1, 1973. We dissent.
Concurring Opinion
concurring with majority.
I concur oh authority of Asmus v. Nebraska Public Power Dist., 186 Neb. 760, 186 N. W. 2d 480 (1971). In extending the time for preparation of a bill of exceptions, we there said: “In m'ány' cases . . . .on motion
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Krueger-Ihle Electric Company, a corporation v. Petring Motor Company, a corporation
- Status
- Published