Hughes v. Stearns
Hughes v. Stearns
Opinion of the Court
This is an attempted appeal by the defendants trom the judgment and an order denying a new trial. Upon the hearing a motion was made by the respondent to dismiss the appeal upon the grounds — First, that at the time of the taking of the purported appeal no judgment had been perfected in the action by the filing in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of a judgment roll; ar.d, second that the order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial was not entered of record at. the time the appeal was taken.
The second ground would not be a sufficient ground for the dismissal of the appeal, but, if sustained, would preclude the court from considering the evidence in the case. Martin v. Smith, 11 S D. 437, 78 N. W. 1001; State v. Lamm, 9 S. D. 418, 69 N. W. 592; Bank v. Oliver, 11 S. D. 444, 78 N. W. 1002; Neeley v. Roberts, 78 N. W. 634, 80 N. W. 130.
The first ground of the motion, however, if sustained by the record, would necessitate the dismissal of the appeal. It appears from the respondent’s additional abstract — and it is not denied by the appellants in any additional or amended abstract —that no judgment roll was in fact made up and filed, and that the order denying the motion for a new trial had not been entered, at the time the appeal was taken. In Martin v. Smith,
Reference
- Cited By
- 1 case
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- 1. That an appeal was taken before entry of record of an order denying a motion for a new trial is not a sufficient ground for dismissal. 2. Where an appeal is taken prior to the perfection of the judgment by filing the judgment roll in the circuit court clerk’s office, it will be dismissed, since the filing of the judgment roll is a condition precedent.