Case ID: wash_74/html/0331-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Morris, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

[No. 11080.
    Department Two.
    July 15, 1913.]
    Fred Howard, Respondent, v. Bussell Land Company, Appellant.
      
    
    Appeal — Review—Statement op Pacts — Dismissal. A statement of facts, filed after time without any extension granted, will he struck out, and the appeal dismissed where no question is raised outside the statement.
    Motion to strike the statement of facts on appeal from a judgment of the superior court for Yakima county, Grady, J., entered October 21, 1912.
    Appeal dismissed.
    
      II. J. Snively, for appellant.
    
      McAulay Meigs, for respondent.
    
      
       Reported in 133 Pac. 596.
    
   Morris, J.

— Upon the hearing of this appeal, a motion was made to strike the statement of facts upon the ground that the same was not filed nor served within thirty days from the entry of the judgment, and no extension of time had been granted. Judgment was entered October 21, 1912, and the proposed statement of facts was filed and served November 21, 1912. No extension having been granted, this was too late. Rem. & Bal. Code, § 393 (P. C. 81 § 693), provides that a proposed statement of facts must be filed and served before or within thirty days after the time begins to run within which an appeal can be taken, unless such time be enlarged by an order of the court. It will be noted that this proposed statement was served and filed on the thirty-first day. If we extend the time fixed by the statute one day, we could extend it a hundred days and thus work a repeal of the statute. No question is raised in this case outside of the statement of facts. To strike, therefore, works a dismissal of the appeal. The appeal is dismissed and the judgment of the lower court affirmed.

Main, Ellis, and Fullerton, JJ., concur.