Redfield v. Parks
| Decision Date | 13 May 1889 |
| Parties | REDFIELD v. PARKS et al |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Sol. F. Clark, for plaintiff in error.
Danl. W. Jones, for defendants in error.
This is a writ of error to the circuit court of the United States for the Eastern district of Arkansas, in an ejectment suit brought in that court by Jared E. Red. against William P. Parks and other defendants, in which a judgment was rendered on the 28th of April, 1885, dismissing the complaint on the merits. The plaintiff has brought the writ of error. The suit appears to have been commenced on April 11, 1882. It appears from the transcript of the record filed in this court that a complaint and several answers were filed, and sundry exceptions, and that the case was tried by the court on the written waiver of a jury, and that the court, having heard the evidence of both parties, found the issues for the defendants. There is a bill of exceptions which finds certain facts specially and certain conclusions of law in favor of the defendants, and contains exceptions by the plaintiff to those conclusions, and prayers to the court by the plaintiff to find certain conclusions of law, and a refusal by the court so to find, and exceptions by the plaintiff to such refusal.
We find it impossible, under our rules, to hear the case as it stands. The pleadings referred to in the transcript of the record are not set forth. Rule 8, subd. 1, provides as follows: '(1) The clerk of the court to which any writ or error may be directed shall make return of the same, by transmitting a true copy of the record and of the assignment of errors, and of all proceedings in the case, under his hand and the seal of the court.' Rule 8, subd. 3, provides as follows: '(3) No case will be heard until a complete record, containing in itself, and not by reference, all the papers, exhibits, depositions, and other proceedings, which are necessary to the hearing in this court, shall be filed.' The transcript of the record was filed in this court on April 5, 1886. The certificate of the clerk of the circuit court to the transcript is dated March 8, 1886, and does not comply with rule 8, subd. 1, for it only certifies 'that the foregoing writing, annexed to this certificate, is a true, correct, and compared copy of the original remaining of record in my office.' It does not say, as required by the rule, that the annexed papers are 'a true copy of the record, and of the assignment of errors, and of all proceedings...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Baltimore, C. & A. Ry. Co. v. Wicomico County Com'rs
-
West v. East Coast Cedar Co.
... ... up is too meager, the appellate court, ... [113 F. 742.] ... upon proper application, settles it by a certiorari ... Redfield v. Parks, 130 U.S. 625, 9 Sup.Ct. 642, 32 ... L.Ed. 1053; Hoskin v. Fisher, 125 U.S. 217, 8 ... Sup.Ct. 834, 31 L.Ed. 759. If it contain ... ...
-
Hutson v. Coffman
...pleadings in a record on appeal, Clune v. United States, 159 U.S. 590, 593, 16 S.Ct. 125, 40 L.Ed. 269, and Redfield v. Parks, 130 U.S. 623, 624, 625, 9 S.Ct. 642, 32 L.Ed. 1053. "The practice and the requirements upon appeals in bankruptcy cases are substantially the same as in other cases......
-
State of Kansas v. Meriwether
... ... dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. Keene v ... Whittaker, 13 Pet. 459, 10 L.Ed. 246; Redfield v ... Parks, 130 U.S. 623, 9 Sup.Ct. 642, 32 L.Ed. 1053; ... Meyer v. Implement Co., 29 C.C.A. 465, 85 F. 874 ... This power, however, ought not ... ...