Case ID: iowa_72/html/0074-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Reed, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Wise v. Usry.
    1. Trial den ovo írepokter’s notes not extended in time. Where the reporter’s notes were not extended or certifled to by Mm within six months of the rendition of the decree appealed from, heWthata trial de novo could not be had in this court, even though within that time the trial judge had appended his certificate to the notes, stating that they contained all the evidence offered, and the notes so certified had been filed in the clerk’s ofiice. (Compare Merritt v. Boive, 69 Iowa, 653.)
    2. Assignment of Errors: time oe piling. An assignment of errors filed after the adjournment of the term to which the appeal is taken, and after the appellee’s argument is filed, cannot be considered. {Bus-sell v. Johnston, 67 Iowa, 279, followed.)
    
      Appeal from, Polk Cirouit Gourt.
    
    Saturday, June 18.
    Aotiow in equity to redeem certain real estate from tax sale after the execution of a treasurer’s deed. The judgment of the circuit court establishes plaintiff’s right to make the redemption. Defendant appeals.
    
      St. John & Whisenand and J. S. Polk, for appellant.
    
      T. F. Stevenson, for appellee.
   Reed, J.

The evidence offered and introduced on the trial was taken down in short-hand by the reporter, and at the end of the trial the judge of the circuit court before whom the cause was tried attached his certificate to the short-hand notes, to the effect that they contained all of' the evidence offered or introduced by the parties. The notes were filed by the clerk, but they were not extended or certified to by the reporter until after the expiration of six months from the trial. On this state of the record, the cause cannot be tried de novo in this court. Merrill v. Bowe, 69 Iowa, 653. Appellant, however, has filed an assignment of errors, and we are asked to consider the cause as an ordinary action, and determine the questions raised by the assignment. But the assignment of errors was not filed until after the adjournment of the term to which the appeal was taken, nor until after appellee’s argument was filed. It therefore came too late, and we cannot consider the questions attempted to be raised by it. Russell v. Johnston, 67 Iowa, 279.

Affirmed.