Blodgett v. McVey

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtSHERWIN
Citation131 Iowa 552,108 N.W. 239
Decision Date11 July 1906
PartiesBLODGETT v. MCVEY, JUDGE.

131 Iowa 552
108 N.W. 239

BLODGETT
v.
MCVEY, JUDGE.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

July 11, 1906.


Certiorari to District Court, Polk County.

Action of certiorari to review the action of the defendant. The opinion states the case. Affirmed.

[108 N.W. 240]

D. T. Blodgett and B. H. French, for plaintiff.

Jesse O. Miller and Robert O. Brennan, for defendant.


SHERWIN, J.

In August, 1902, an information charging the plaintiff herein and others with the violation of an ordinance of the city of Des Moines against gambling was filed in the police court of said city. In September, a trial was had on said information in said court which resulted in the conviction of the plaintiff. He appealed from the judgment therein rendered to the district court of Polk county, and the original papers filed in the police court were sent to the district court and duly filed therein. In making a transcript of his docket, the police judge inadvertently entered the case “State of Iowa v. D. T. Blodgett,” and it was so entitled on the criminal record of the district court. The case came on for trial in the district court in March, 1903, and all proceedings were conducted in the name of “City of Des Moines v. D. T. Blodgett.” The instructions of the court were so entitled, and instructed the jury that the defendant in that case was accused of the crime of gambling in violation of an ordinance of the city of Des Moines. The defendant was again found guilty of violating the ordinance in question and was adjudged to pay a fine of $50. Afterwards, the defendant appealed to this court entitling the case “City of Des Moines v. D. T. Blodgett.” The case was docketed here, but no abstract or argument was filed by the defendant herein, and in 1903 the appeal was dismissed because it appeared from the record before us that the appeal was in a case entitled “City of Des Moines v. Blodgett,” while the transcript showed that the judgment was entered in a case entitled “State of Iowa v. Blodgett.” Nothing further was done by the plaintiff herein except to pay a part of the judgment, until in December, 1905, when he filed a motion in the district court, asking that the judgment entered in the case be set aside and be declared null and void for want of jurisdiction in the district court to render same; the specific point being made that no indictment had been returned by the grand jury of the county. The motion was overruled, and the district court directed the clerk thereof to correct the criminal record of said court so that the same would show the correct title of the case, viz., “City of Des Moines v. D. T. Blodgett.” This was accordingly done, and thereafter this writ was granted; the petition therefor alleging error on the part of the trial court in ordering the record corrected, and error in not sustaining the motion because the district court had no jurisdiction to try the case.

We shall not discuss or determine whether the trial court committed error in ordering a correction...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Manning v. Engelkes, No. 62521
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 27, 1979
    ...196, 213 S.E.2d 729 (1975) (no standing for defendant to appeal denial of plaintiff's motion for voluntary nonsuit); Blodgett v. McVey, 131 Iowa 552, 108 N.W. 239 (1906) (certiorari not granted and action of inferior tribunal not annulled absent showing of prejudice); Mundy v. Warren, 268 N......
  • Salt Lake City v. Doran, 2410
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • March 31, 1913
    ...20; Seattle v. Chin Let, 52 P. 324 (Wash.) ; State v. Flint, 63 Conn. 248, 28; A. 28; McInerney v. Denver. 29 P. 516; Blodget v. McVey, 108 N.W. 239; Pekin v. Smelzel, 21 Ill. 464; McPherson v. Chebanse, 28 N. E. (Ill.) 454; State v. Newman, 71 N. W. (Wis.) 438; State ex rel. City of Butte ......
  • Town of Neola v. Reichart
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 26, 1906
    ...and not to be inconsistent with the statutes of the state denouncing assaults and batteries and affrays. In Blodgett v. McVey (Iowa) 108 N. W. 239, the statute expressly authorized the enactment of an ordinance prohibiting gambling, and is in harmony with all the authorities, for where the ......
  • State v. Staten, No. 17977.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 2, 1916
    ...under the law. Davison v. Otis, 24 Mich. loc. cit. 25; People v. Leavitt, 41 Mich. 470, 2 N. W. 812; Blodgett v. McVey, 131 Iowa, 552, 108 N. W. 239; Colden v. Botts, 12 Wend. (N. Y.) IV. If relator had any interest in the subject-matter of this controversy, and desired to have the proceedi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Manning v. Engelkes, No. 62521
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • June 27, 1979
    ...196, 213 S.E.2d 729 (1975) (no standing for defendant to appeal denial of plaintiff's motion for voluntary nonsuit); Blodgett v. McVey, 131 Iowa 552, 108 N.W. 239 (1906) (certiorari not granted and action of inferior tribunal not annulled absent showing of prejudice); Mundy v. Warren, 268 N......
  • Salt Lake City v. Doran, 2410
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Utah
    • March 31, 1913
    ...20; Seattle v. Chin Let, 52 P. 324 (Wash.) ; State v. Flint, 63 Conn. 248, 28; A. 28; McInerney v. Denver. 29 P. 516; Blodget v. McVey, 108 N.W. 239; Pekin v. Smelzel, 21 Ill. 464; McPherson v. Chebanse, 28 N. E. (Ill.) 454; State v. Newman, 71 N. W. (Wis.) 438; State ex rel. City of Butte ......
  • Town of Neola v. Reichart
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • September 26, 1906
    ...and not to be inconsistent with the statutes of the state denouncing assaults and batteries and affrays. In Blodgett v. McVey (Iowa) 108 N. W. 239, the statute expressly authorized the enactment of an ordinance prohibiting gambling, and is in harmony with all the authorities, for where the ......
  • State v. Staten, No. 17977.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • June 2, 1916
    ...under the law. Davison v. Otis, 24 Mich. loc. cit. 25; People v. Leavitt, 41 Mich. 470, 2 N. W. 812; Blodgett v. McVey, 131 Iowa, 552, 108 N. W. 239; Colden v. Botts, 12 Wend. (N. Y.) IV. If relator had any interest in the subject-matter of this controversy, and desired to have the proceedi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT