Galvin v. Ostrander Fire Brick Co.
| Decision Date | 03 June 1913 |
| Citation | 84 N.J.L. 530,87 A. 84 |
| Parties | GALVIN v. OSTRANDER FIRE BRICK CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Appeal from District Court.
Action by Richard J. Galvin against the Ostrander Fire Brick Company. From an adverse judgment, defendant appeals. Appeal dismissed.
Argued February term, 1913, before TRENCHARD, PARKER, and VOORHEES, JJ.
Adrian Lyon, of Perth Amboy, for appellant.
Thomas Brown, of Perth Amboy, for appellee.
The state of the case submitted consists only of the as provided in the district court appeal act of 1902, p. 566 (C. S. 1910, p. 2016, § 213b). This, as has several times been held in reported cases, is not sufficient. There must be a judgment record before this court, on which it may impress its ruling of affirmance or reversal; and the absence of such judgment record leads to a dismissal of the appeal. Esler v. Camden & Suburban Railway Co., 71 N. J. Law, 180, 182, 58 Atl. 113; Boland v. Kaveny, 71 N. J. Law, 488, 489, 58 Atl. 99; Katzin v. Jenny, 74 N. J. Law, 131, 65 Atl. 192; Nissel v. Swinley, 74 N. J. Law, 344, 68 Atl. 112; Smith Co. v. Oathout, 75 N. J. Law, 438, 67 Atl. 1023. A copy of the judgment record must be furnished to the court. Rule 90.
Appellant has further disregarded rule 90 in failing to submit a copy of the specification of the determinations or directions of the district court with which he is dissatisfied in point of law. This rule was promulgated in June, 1907, and referred to in Kearns v. Waldron, 76 N. J. Law, 370, 371, 69 Atl. 960. Such specification corresponds to an assignment of errors at common law, and if there be no specification there is no error assigned; and, while the judgment might, perhaps, be affirmed (see Champlin v. Barthold, 82 N. J. Law, 13, 81 Atl. 490), the practice has been, in the absence of any specification whatever, to dismiss the appeal. Sentliffer v. Jacobs, 86 Atl. 929, decided May, 1913.
The state of the case being defective in both of the particulars mentioned, the appeal will be dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
F. Bowden Co. v. Deuschle
...case, there is no copy of the required papers and no judgment record. Katzin v. Jenny, 74 N.J.L. 131, 65 A. 192. In Galvir. v. Ostrander Brick Co., 84 N.J.L. 530, 87 A. 84, it was held: "There must be a judgment record before this court, on which it may impress its ruling of affirmance or r......
-
Smith v. Paine
...Barthold, 82 N. J. Law, 13, 81 A. 490), or the appeal dismissed (Sentliffer v. Jacobs, 84 N. J. Law, 128, 86 A. 929; Galvin v. Ostrander Co., 84 N. J. Law, 530, 87 A. 84). But, inasmuch as this appeal has been greatly delayed by some oversight in perfecting its presentation, we have deemed ......
- Kendel v. Guterl