Case ID: w-va_103/html/0029-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Miller, Judge:", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CHARLESTON.
    Harry W. Nicola v. A. R. Williams
    (No. C. C. 395)
    Submitted January 12, 1927.
    Decided January 18, 1927.
    Appeal and Error — Dismissal in Circuit Court on Motion to Quash Summons and Return May Not be Reviewed by Cer- . tificate of Trial Court (Code, c. 135, § 1).
    
    When a ease has been dismissed in the circuit court on motion to quash the summons and return, this court has no jurisdiction under section 1 of chapter 135 of the Code to review by certificate of the trial court the questions arising on said motion.
    (Appeal and Error, 3 C. J. § 934a [Anno].)
    (Nora: Parenthetical references by Editors, C. J. — Cyc. Not part of syllabi.)
    Certified Case from Circuit Court, Preston County.
    Action by Harry W. Nicola against A. R. Williams. On motion the trial court quashed the summons and return, and certifies the cause.
    
      Dismissed.
    
    
      James C. Holt, for plaintiff.
    
      F. F. Parmclc, for defendant.
   Miller, Judge:

In this action of trespass on the case, counsel for the defendant appeared specially and moved the trial court to quash the summons and return. The order of the court ruling on the motion recites: “It is therefore considered by the Court that said summons be quashed, and said suit dismissed, to which action of the Court the plaintiff, by his attorney, excepts ; and the Court thereupon, upon its own motion, certifies this cause to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia, for its decision upon the sufficiency of said summons and return. ’ ’

The order of the circuit court dismissing the action is a final one; and this court has no jurisdiction except by writ of error. “A final order is not reviewable by this court upon joint application of the parties, or by the court’s own motion, under the latter part of section 1, chapter 135 of the Code.” State v. Crockett, 94 W. Va. 423; Heater v. Lloyd, 85 W. Va. 570; Gas Company v. Shreve, 90 W. Va. 277; Marks v. Mitchell, Id. 702; Saffel v. Woodyard, Id. 747; Lee v. City of Elkins, 97 W. Va. 183.

The case will therefore be dismissed for want of jurisdiction of this court to consider the questions presented by the circuit court’s certificate.

Dismissed.