State v. Boyd

• Decision Date: 25 May 1892
• Citation: 52 N.W. 513,85 Iowa 740
• Parties: STATE v. BOYD ET AL.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

85 Iowa 740

52 N.W. 513

STATE

v.BOYD ET AL.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

May 25, 1892.

Appeal from district court, Story county; D. R. HINDMAN, Judge.

Action in equity to restrain defendants from maintaining a nuisance by keeping for sale and selling intoxicating liquors in violation of law. After a hearing on the merits a decree was rendered in favor of plaintiff, as prayed. The defendants appeal.J. F. Martin and Funson & Gifford, for appellants.

ROBINSON, C. J.

The decree of the district court was rendered on the 29th day of May, 1890. The plaintiff shows, by an additional abstract, that the translation of the shorthand reporter's notes was not filed in the office of the clerk of the district court until the 6th day of January, 1891. That was not in time to secure a trial de novo in this court. Arts v. Culbertson, 73 Iowa, 14, 34 N. W. Rep. 490;Kavalier v. Machula, 77 Iowa, 124, 41 N. W. Rep. 590.

Errors have been assigned by appellants, of which some have not been noticed in argument, and others relate to the effect of the evidence, and cannot be considered. The only assignment which, by the most liberal rule of practice, can be regarded as requiring attention is one which charges error in the court in taxing, as a part of the cost in favor of the attorney for plaintiff, a fee of $35. The theory of the assignment is that such a fee cannot be taxed in cases prosecuted by the county attorney; but it was held in State v. Douglas, 75 Iowa, 434, 39 N. W. Rep. 686, that an attorney's fee is taxable in such cases, as well as in those prosecuted by private citizens. No ground is shown for reversing the decree of the district court. It is therefore affirmed.