Roush v. Dist. Court of Eighth Judicial Dist. for Cascade Cnty., No. 7517.
| Docket Nº | No. 7517. |
| Citation | 101 Mont. 166 |
| Case Date | December 30, 1935 |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Montana |
101 Mont. 166
ROUSH
v.
DISTRICT COURT OF EIGHTH JUDICIAL DIST. FOR CASCADE COUNTY et al.
No. 7517.
Supreme Court of Montana.
Dec. 30, 1935.
Original proceeding by Theresa Roush against the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District and for Cascade County, and H. H. Ewing, Judge Presiding, for a writ of mandate to compel the district court to set a certain cause for trial.
Writ denied and proceeding dismissed.
O'Leary & Stromnes, of Great Falls, for petitioner.
Speer & Hoffman, of Great Falls, for respondents.
ANDERSON, Justice.
This is an original proceeding brought by petitioner to secure a writ of mandate to compel the district court to set the cause of Roush v. Chester for trial in department No. 2 of the district court of Cascade county. The respondent court filed answer, admitting many allegations of the petition and denying others. At the time the alternative writ was issued, it was understood by this court that none of the facts were in dispute. In accordance with the established practice of this court in like circumstances, we will consider the cause on the facts which are admitted and disregard the allegations of the petition which are denied in the answer. Rider v. Cooney, 94 Mont. 295, 23 P.(2d) 261.
The petitioner here, who was the plaintiff in the court below, filed her complaint in the district court of Cascade county where she and the defendant therein, Roy Chester, resided, setting forth a cause of action in tort for personal injuries arising out of a highway accident which occurred on December 4, 1934, and alleged to have been proximately caused by the negligence of Chester. On September 18, 1935, by leave of court the plaintiff filed her first amended complaint which was served on counsel for defendant. Thereafter, on October 24, 1935, defendant filed his answer to the amended complaint, denying many of the allegations and affirmatively pleading three defenses. By order of the district court a calling of the calendar for cases at issue was set for Friday, November 1, 1935, and on that date this cause was set for trial to commence on December 2, 1935. It appears that counsel for the respective parties were in court on the day of the calling of the calendar and the setting of the cause for trial. According to the petition of plaintiff filed here, counsel for the defendant was there present and consented or acquiesced to the setting of the cause for trial. The answer of the court admits the presence of counsel for the defendant, but denies either agreement or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Boston v. Buchanan, No. 96,470.
...Law Dictionary, 657; Dickerson v. Stoll, 24 N.J.Law, 550 [(1854)]. Roush v. District Court of Eighth Judicial Dist. for Cascade County, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96, 97-98 ¶ 7 We hold that a case is at issue when issues are made up, or when the defendant has failed to plead within the time all......
-
Hanson's Estate, In re, Nos. 9321-9321A
...ex rel. Nissler v. Donlan, 32 Mont. 256, 261, 262, 80 P. 244; State v. Kacar, 74 Mont. 269, 276, 240 P. 365; Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96; State ex rel. Magnuson v. District Court, 125 Mont. 79, 85, 231 P.2d 941, On July 13, 1953, being prior to the service of appellan......
-
State ex rel. Magnuson v. District Court of First Judicial Dist., in and for Lewis and Clark County, No. 9050
...when properly promulgated, have all the force and effect of law within the territorial limits of the district. Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96; State v. Kacar, 74 Mont. 269, 240 P. 365. And such rules properly adopted are binding on the court and its officers as well as o......
-
State ex rel. Thompson v. District Court, Fourth Judicial Dist., No. 9812
...2d Ed., 147; 2 Cooley's Blackstone, 1091; Black's Law Dictionary, 657; Dickerson v. Stoll, 24 N.J.L. 550.' Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96, In this action there is a demurrer pending as the sole pleading on behalf of the defendant, certainly the cause is not at issue and ......
-
Boston v. Buchanan, No. 96,470.
...Law Dictionary, 657; Dickerson v. Stoll, 24 N.J.Law, 550 [(1854)]. Roush v. District Court of Eighth Judicial Dist. for Cascade County, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96, 97-98 ¶ 7 We hold that a case is at issue when issues are made up, or when the defendant has failed to plead within the time all......
-
Hanson's Estate, In re, Nos. 9321-9321A
...ex rel. Nissler v. Donlan, 32 Mont. 256, 261, 262, 80 P. 244; State v. Kacar, 74 Mont. 269, 276, 240 P. 365; Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96; State ex rel. Magnuson v. District Court, 125 Mont. 79, 85, 231 P.2d 941, On July 13, 1953, being prior to the service of appellan......
-
State ex rel. Magnuson v. District Court of First Judicial Dist., in and for Lewis and Clark County, No. 9050
...when properly promulgated, have all the force and effect of law within the territorial limits of the district. Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96; State v. Kacar, 74 Mont. 269, 240 P. 365. And such rules properly adopted are binding on the court and its officers as well as o......
-
State ex rel. Thompson v. District Court, Fourth Judicial Dist., No. 9812
...2d Ed., 147; 2 Cooley's Blackstone, 1091; Black's Law Dictionary, 657; Dickerson v. Stoll, 24 N.J.L. 550.' Roush v. District Court, 101 Mont. 166, 53 P.2d 96, In this action there is a demurrer pending as the sole pleading on behalf of the defendant, certainly the cause is not at issue and ......