Case ID: iowa_66/html/0644-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Beck, Oh. J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Buford & Co. et al. v. Strother & Conklin et al.
    1. Practice in Supreme Court: trial de novo : evidence wanting. This cause being triable de novo, and the evidence not being properly before this court, the appeal is dismissed and the judgment affirmed.
    • Appeal from Houcard Circuit Court.
    
    Thursday, July 23.
    Action in chancery to enforce certain liens, judgments and claims held by plaintiffs against property of the defendants Strother & Conklin. Other creditors, holders of judgments and liens, were made defendants. A receiver of-the property of the debtors was appointed. By the final decree no part of the proceeds of the property was appropriated to the payment of the claim held by plaintiffs. They appeal to this court.
    
      Ellis, Murphy <£> Gould, for appellants.
    
      Heed oB Marsh and McCarty cfi McCooh, for appellees.
   Beck, Oh. J.

The ease is triable in this court de novo. In the abstract of plaintiffs it is alleged that all the evidence is set out therein. Defendants, by amended abstracts, deny that all the evidence is set out in the abstracts of plaintiffs and defendants, and allege that no part of it is certified or identified by the record of the court below. It is shown by the original evidence and records submitted to us that the fact is as alleged by defendants. There is no certificate or identification by the court or judge trying the case; and a certificate of the clerk fails to identify and show all the evidence in the case. We cannot, therefore, try the case, and must order it to be affirmed.

Certain motions to affirm, dismiss the appeal, and strike the evidence from the abstract, need not be considered.

Affirmed.