French v. Lancaster
| Decision Date | 25 May 1881 |
| Citation | 2 Dak. 276,9 N.W. 716 |
| Parties | French and others v. Lancaster and others. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
Appeal from Lawrence county.
Motion to return transcript to the district court for correction.
As the argument upon the appeal in this cause is to be postponed to the next term, and the record must be returned to the district court for correction, we have deemed it a proper case, and this the proper time, to enforce the rules of practice relating to the preparation of bills of exceptions. The court has directed that the exceptions be restated, with so much of the evidence as shall be necessary to a proper understanding and determination thereof, and no more. We have also directed that such evidence be separated from the mass sent here, and properly arranged and classified with each exception.
The practice of counsel in sending to this court a transcript of the record from the lower court, which record is made up by incorporating in the bill of exceptions all the testimony in mass, as it fell from the lips of the witnesses, or was otherwise adduced, without separating it, and arranging it under proper heads and with the appropriate exceptions, can no longer be tolerated. The record in this cause consists of some 2,700 manuscript pages. Much of the documentory evidence is duplicated, and so, in some instances, are also the motions and proceedings in the lower court. Other cases are and have been here with still more voluminous transcripts, and it is known to the members of this court that, in some cases tried in the first district, the evidence has covered more than 5,000 manuscript pages. The expense to litigants, and the labor involved in the proper examination of such a crude, undigested, unarranged, conglomerated mass of matter as the transcript in this case presents, is intolerable, is wholly unnecessary, and could easily be avoided by a proper compliance with the rules of practice. It is the duty of the judge in the district court, before authenticating the record, or signing the bill of exceptions, to see to it that the rules of practice are complied with. The justices of this court are judges of the district courts for their respective districts, have their time largely occupied by their duties as such district judges, and have no leisure in this court to select and arrange great masses of evidence, in order to an intelligent understanding and proper determination of the questions involved. Where the transcript is very brief, and the evidence adduced quite limited, the necessity for the enforcement of the rule is not so apparent. But where, as in this case, a careful examination of the transcript alone will involve days of labor, counsel cannot reasonably expect the judges to perform the duties which belong to co...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tolman v. N.M. & Dakota Mica Co.
...in this respect. Since the clear and explicit statements by this court of the proper practice in this respect, in the case of French v. Lancaster, 2 Dak. 276, S. C. 9 N. W. Rep. 716, and St. Croix Lumber Co. v. Pennington, 2 Dak. 467, S. C. 11 N. W. Rep. 497, it ought not to be necessary fo......
-
Fargo v. Palmer
...of settling bills of exception, and bringing appeals to this court, is again very carefully gone over by Mr. Justice MOODY in French v. Lancaster, 2 Dak. 276;S. C. 9 N. W. Rep. 716; and in another very carefully prepared opinion in case of Golden Terra Min. Co. v. Smith, 2 Dak. 377;S. C. 11......
- French v. Lancaster