Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-06-16
RIGHT OF APPEAL.
Supreme Court Decision In Case Of
Watson Us Haybsrfy.
JUSTICE MINER A DIssENrER,
Two 0Ihpr Cases Dccided-Campbell
Found Guilty Of Common Assault
Damage Sni i--rourt Notes.

The Supreme court handed down an
opinion todny In the case OF Harriet
Ann Watson and David Mckay re-
spondents We Andrew p. Mayberry
appellant, affirming the judgment OF
the court below. Chief Justice Zane
delivered the opinion and ia cvncurrcd
In by District Judge Charles II. Hart.
Justice Miner nles a Desc nting
opinion.
The question before the court was,
must sn appeal ba taken within one
year from the rendition OF the udg.
ment, or within sixty lays from Its
rendition when the exception is to the
decision or the verdict on the ground
that 1t Ia not supported by the evidences
OF within one year in the one case, or
sixty days In the other from the date
OF the order overriding the motion.
Under the territorial statutes an sr.
peal wac allowed from var Gus inter.
ioeutory orders anu Judgments, from
Judgments entered on n verdict and
upon the findings OF the court and also
from orders granting new trials. The
Constitution limited appeals to those
from final Judgments upon the hear
ing. The Supreme court still has The
right to review errors assigned
upon other various orders anu
judgments committed III everything
motions for new trlaip. Ths statutes
OF the territory limited the time with
In which an appeal might be- taken
rom Judgments to one year after their
ats % In ua n raj q
ton IL to the decision or verdics on
the ground that 1t IL not supported by
the evidence. The court holds that
the term final judgm Used In the
Constitution means q judgment that
has terminated the. litigation be-
tween the parties In the court
rendered ana thst the Judgment
does not become final when
motion for q new trial Ia entered In
the term prescribed by the statute
until the motion for new trial Ia
Ovsrrul"O.
The defendant in this case applied to
the v uIleu e,tatvs III d patent OF the
darrison mining claim, located In the
west mountain mining districL The
Plaintiffs protested and 1leu an sd-
ver.e claim to part OF the same
trouud, alleging that shs Diana
mining claim owPsd by them was
luoludsd In the dsfendRnt'z claim.
Plaintiffs filed a complaint Ia the
rbird district court setting fourth this
act and asking 10 have their rights
established. The defendant fled an
,nswer denying the allegations OF
plaintiff and setting up iscss upon
which he relied To establish his title.
AT the trial the court found the
issues Of essential facts for defendant
except az to the discovery OF
the Harrison claim anu found
he issue as to that fact for plaintiff,
rendering judgment for the plaintiffs
IN the findings. Defendanps motion
or a new trial was overrnied and he
perfected an appeal from the judgment
aud from the order everything MS mo-
zion for new trial.
The plaintiffs moved TO dismiss the
appeal from the order overriding mo-
ton Tor new trial, claiming no appeal
lies from such an order.
The court held that when m otion
for new trial has been made, the
Judgment becomes final for the pull
poses Of an appeal, when 1t Is oveI-
ruled, and that au appeal may be- taken
within one year alter the Gu
ry OF such an order; but that
an exception to the decision
ur verdict on the ground tnat 1t 10 not
supported by the evidence, cannot bs
(C0nttnted on rage 1W0.)