Foote v. Smith
Decision Date | 13 November 1899 |
Citation | 58 P. 898,8 Wyo. 510 |
Parties | FOOTE v. SMITH, ET AL |
Court | Wyoming Supreme Court |
RESERVED questions from the District Court, Johnson County HON. JOSEPH L. STOTTS, Judge.
Motion to discontinue, upon dismissal in the District Court.
G. E A. Moeller, W. S. Metz, and Gibson Clark, for plaintiff.
Clark & Fisher and C. H. Parmelee, for defendants.
This cause was pending in the district court for Johnson County. Upon consideration of the separate general demurrers filed by two of the defendants to the petition, the district court reserved certain important and difficult questions deemed to arise therein, for the decision of this court.
Before a hearing thereon, plaintiff files a motion for the discontinuance of further consideration of the cause in this court, for the reason that on October 5, 1899, he dismissed the action in the district court. Filed with the motion is a certified copy of a journal entry of said court of the date last aforesaid showing that the plaintiff then came and entered a dismissal of the action without prejudice. Notice of the motion to discontinue in this court was served upon counsel for the defendants, but they have not appeared to contest the same.
The motion will be sustained; further consideration of the cause discontinued in this court, and the clerk ordered to return the original papers to the district court.
In Veazie v. Wadleigh, 36 U.S. 55, 11 Peters 55, 9 L.Ed. 630, a similar motion was granted by the Supreme Court of the United States in a cause sent to that court upon a division of opinion of the judges of the circuit court. The opinion was delivered by Mr. Justice Story, who said in part:
Under the statute authorizing the district courts to reserve for the decision of this court important and difficult questions arising in a cause, it has been held that questions, and not cases, are authorized to be certified to this court; and that the case itself is not here...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McCarty v. Kepreta
...the fact that questions presented are no longer concrete, decline to act on them. See: Re Kaeppler, 7 N.D. 307, 75 N.W. 253; Foote v. Smith, 8 Wyo. 510, 58 P. 898; Sutcliffe v. McSweeney, 102 Ga. 807, 30 S.E. Meyer v. Pritchard, 131 U.S. 209 and 23 L.Ed. 961; Berry v. Des Moines, 115 Iowa 4......
-
Ex parte Hopper
...or relinquishes the right to do, some act in respect to which the appeal was taken. Wallingford v. Benson, 17 S.C. 591; Foote v. Smith, 8 Wyo. 510, 58 Pac. 898; 2 Cent.Dig. Appeal and Error, § 70 et seq. The condition may also arise from the act of the court a quo, that is to say, from some......
-
Siegelman v. Alabama Ass'n of School Bds.
...does, or relinquishes the right to do, some act in respect to which the appeal was taken. Wallingford v. Benson, 17 S.C. 591; Foote v. Smith, 8 Wyo. 510, 58 P. 898; 2 Cent. Dig. Appeal and Error, § 70 et seq. The condition may also arise from the act of the court a quo, that is to say, from......
-
Spence v. Baldwin County Sav. & Loan Ass'n
...or relinquishes the right to do, some act in respect to which the appeal was taken. Wallingford v. Benson, 17 S.C. 591; Foote v. Smith, 8 Wyo. 510, 58 Pac. 898; 2 Cent.Dig. Appeal and Error, § 70 et seq. The condition may also arise from the act of the court a quo, that is to say, from some......