Crowe v. De Soto Consol. School Dist.

Citation66 N.W.2d 859,246 Iowa 38
Decision Date16 November 1954
Docket NumberNo. 48606,48606
PartiesBessle CROWE, Appellee, v. DE SOTO CONSOLIDATED SCHOOL DISTRICT, St. Paul-Mercury Indemnity Co. of St. Paul, Minn., Appellants.
CourtIowa Supreme Court

Hoffmann & Hoffmann, Des Moines, for appellants.

Doran, Doran, Doran & Erbe, Boone, for appellee.

LARSON, Justice.

Defendants appealed the Iowa Industrial Commissioner's finding of liability for disability resulting from an alleged service-connected employment as a school teacher. The trial court made a finding in favor of the plaintiff upholding the Iowa Industrial Commissioner's determination, and defendants have attempted to appeal as a matter of right pursuant to rule 331(a), Rules of Civil Procedure, 58 I.C.A. The record makes no reference to the entry of judgment, and in the belief that such judgment entry had been inadvertently omitted we requested the clerk of the trial court to certify and transmit to us the final judgment. The clerk advised that final judgment has not been entered.

Rule 331(a) provides: 'All final judgments and decisions of courts of record * * * may be appealed * * *.' Rule 331(b) states that no interlocutory ruling or decision may be appealed until after the final judgment or order, except pursuant to rule 332 upon permission granted by this court or a justice thereof. No attempt has been made here to obtain such permission.

I. We have held many times that we have no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal where no final judgment was entered and no permission to appeal from any ruling less than a final judgment was obtained. Wilson v. Corbin, 241 Iowa 226, 40 N.W.2d 472, and cases cited therein.

II. While plaintiff has not moved to dismiss the appeal or urged the lack of our jurisdiction, we cannot gain jurisdiction by such silence on her part. It is our duty to reject an appeal not authorized by statute. Wilson v. Corbin, supra; Hubbard v. Marsh, 239 Iowa 472, 32 N.W.2d 67, and citations; State ex rel. McPherson v. Rakey, 236 Iowa 876, 882, 20 N.W.2d 43, 46, and citations.

III. As a general rule decisions, opinions, findings or verdicts do not constitute a judgment or decree, but merely form a basis on which the judgment or decree is subsequently to be rendered. 4 C.J.S., Appeal and Error, § 139; 30 Am.Jur., Judgments, § 7; 49 C.J.S., Judgments, § 4. A final judgment or decision is one that finally adjudicates the rights of the parties, and it must put it beyond the power of the court which made it to place the parties in their original positions. It is a determination which may be enforced by execution or in some similar manner. In re Estate of Swanson, 239 Iowa 294, 305, 31 N.W.2d 385, 391, and citations.

We are unable to understand why no judgment entry was made in this matter, for in the trial court's Conclusions of Law it provided 'A judgment or decree may be prepared in accordance with this ruling of the Court by the attorneys for the plaintiff and submitted to the Court for signature.' Under the present state of the record which disclose only the court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, we have no choice but to dismiss this appeal, lacking jurisdiction to entertain it at this time.

IV. In the case of Wilson v. Corbin, supra, in which a similar situation arose, we set aside the submission and gave the parties twenty days in which to have the proper judgment entered nunc pro tunc, and the record corrected to show such judgment. We provided that if so corrected the case would be resubmitted at the next period of this court without further oral or written argument. Such will be our holding herein and, unless so corrected, the appeal will be dismissed during the December period of the present term of this court.

Submission set aside with...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • State v. Tucker
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • May 7, 2021
    ...must be exercised according to law." Id. "It is our duty to reject an appeal not authorized by statute." Crowe v. De Soto Consol. Sch. Dist. , 246 Iowa 38, 40, 66 N.W.2d 859, 860 (1954).Historical practice confirms our textual understanding. Since the founding of our state, the legislative ......
  • DiIaconi v. New Cal Corp.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of New Mexico
    • April 1, 1982
    ...judgment." Catlin v. United States, 324 U.S. 229, 233, 65 S.Ct. 631, 633, 89 L.Ed. 911, 916 (1945).Crowe v. De Soto Consolidated School District, 246 Iowa 38, 66 N.W.2d 859, 860 (1954) says:As a general rule decisions, opinions, findings or verdicts do not constitute a judgment or decree, b......
  • Robco Transp., Inc. v. Ritter
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • October 17, 1984
    ...that which this court invoked in In re Marriage of McCreary, 276 N.W.2d 399, 400 (Iowa 1979) and Crowe v. DeSoto Consolidated School District, 246 Iowa 38, 40, 66 N.W.2d 859, 860 (1954) in order to avoid jurisdictional deficiencies in the entry of final judgment. In McCreary and Crowe, the ......
  • Stearns v. Kean
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • March 18, 1981
    ...916, 918 (1965); see Helland v. Yellow Freight System, Inc., 204 N.W.2d 601, 604 (Iowa 1973); Crowe v. De Soto Consolidated School District, 246 Iowa 38, 40, 66 N.W.2d 859, 860 (1954). A final judgment need not be a judgment entered on a verdict after trial; it may exist in other forms such......
  • 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