Deuch v. Seaside Lodge, No. 12, A.O.U.W.

• Decision Date: 03 December 1894
• Parties: DEUCH v. SEASIDE LODGE, NO. 12, A.O.U.W.
• Court: Oregon Supreme Court

38 P. 337

26 Or. 385

DEUCH v. SEASIDE LODGE, NO. 12, A.O.U.W.

Supreme Court of Oregon

December 3, 1894

Appeal from circuit court, Clatsop county; T.A. McBride, Judge.

Petition for mandamus by William Deuch against the Seaside Lodge, No. 12, A.O.U.W. There was a judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appealed. Dismissed.

Wm. M. La Force, for appellant.

F.D. Winton, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

This is a proceeding for a writ of mandamus, brought here by appeal from the judgment of the circuit court of Clatsop county, which appeal the defendant moves to dismiss. The record discloses that the plaintiff on October 9, 1894, served upon the defendant a notice of appeal from said judgment, in which no grounds of error were specified, and on the same day filed it and an undertaking with the clerk of said court, and two days thereafter filed with said officer an assignment of errors alleged to have been committed by the trial court in rendering said judgment, but failed to serve the same upon the defendant. The transcript of said cause having been filed herein, the defendant submits this motion, and contends that said notice is insufficient to invest the court with jurisdiction of the cause. The statute requires the appellant to specify in his notice the grounds of error upon which he intends to rely upon appeal from a judgment of the circuit court rendered in an action at law. Hill's Ann.Laws Or. § 537. The assignment of errors in a notice of appeal from a judgment rendered in an action at law is the pleading, and the service of such a notice upon the respondent is the process which confers upon the appellate tribunal jurisdiction of the person of the respondent and subject-matter of the action. What the statute has required is a condition precedent to the right of appeal, and the failure to specify in the notice the grounds of error upon which the appellant intended to rely upon appeal gave this court no jurisdiction of the subject-matter; and for this reason the appeal is dismissed.