Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-03-13
Z .,A@'EI.~s
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
STATE OF NEVADA.

Ebenezer TwaddIe and Ebenezer
Twaddle as Special Admir-, Of tn,
Estate of Alexander TWaddle, de
ceased,
Plaintiffs and Respondents
Theodore Winters, A. c. Winters, L
w. Winters and Samuel Tonga
baugh,,
Defendants and Appellants
From I'd Judicial District Court, Wash,
oe County.
Messrs. Cheney and Massey, attorneys
for Plaintiffs.
Alfred chartz, attorney for Defend
ants.
DECISION
The respondents have moved to dis
miss the appeal from the judgment
because it was not taken within one
year, and to dismiss the appeal from
the order of the district court denying
appellants motion for new trial, also
to strike from the records the state
ment on motion for new trial, upon
the ground that the statement was
not filed within the time prescribed
by law. The appeal from the judg-
ment is dismissed because not taken
until March, 1905, more than one
year after its rendition on June %,
1903. On that day Judge Curler CT
the Second Judicial District court
who had tried the case at Reno and
rendered the decree, made in open
court and had entered in the minutes
an order chat all business and all
cases and proceedings that have not
been completed or in the process OF
completion, and all new business that
NAV be brought before the court dur
ing the absence of the presiding Judge,
be referred to Judge NJ. A. Murphy
Of the first judicial district court OF
the State of Nevada. and that he be
requested to try, determine and dis
pose of all cases and buiness now
before the court in the absence OF the
! Judge of this district"
Pursuant to this request Judge Mu"-
, phy occupied the bench in Reno until
1uly 81, 1908, when recess was TAX
on until a further order Of the court
Tbar,a was no other session until
Judse Curriers' return on August 17th
On Ju1v 18th, Judge Murphy, in open
court in Reno, made an order allow
ing plaintiff until August loth u
which to file objection to nndlngs'
and prepare additional findings. On
August Sd Judge Murphy at Carson
Citv. and within his own first juai'
cial district, by an eX parte order
made without affidavit Of Judge Cur
ler.s absence or inability, granted the
defenda hts until September Is, 1908
within which to prepare, file and
serve their notice and statement on
motion fol. a new trial. Later eXtel-
! sions were made by Judge Curler. but
whether they are effectual depends
upon this order, which respondents
claim Judge Murphy was unauthorized
| to make under Section 1877 of the
Practice Act which provides in regard
! to notices and statements on motions
for new trial that the several periods
of time limited may be enlarged by
the written agreement OF the parties
or upon good cause shown, by the
court, or the Judge before whom tht
case is tried" and under district coul'
rule XLIII which directs that mo
Judge, except the judge having charge
further time to plead, move, or do an,
act Or thing required 10 be done IL
any cause or proceeding. unless it b'
shown by affidavit that such judge il
absent from the otate, or from som
other cause is unable to act"
Rule XII provides: when an,
district judge shall have entered upol
the trial or hearing of any cause o
proceeding, demurrer or motion, o
made any ruling, order or declSio.
therein, no other judge shall do an
act or thing in or about said cause
proceeding, demurrer or motion, III
less upon written request OF the Judg
who shall have first entered upon TIL
trial or hearing of said cause, proceed
ing demurrer or notion
Section 1913 of the Compiled laws
passed after section 1877 of the Prac
tice Act as quoted enacts: THE dis
trict judges of the State of Nevad;
shall possess equal coextensive an,
concurrent jurisdiction and power
They shall each have power to hol
court in any county of the State
They shall each exercise and perforr
the powers, duties and functions 1
luc COul dlu vi CuuSSo IAOA WI, uAA'
| of Judges at Chambers. Each judg
shall have power to transact bushes
Z which may be done in chambers a
2 any point within the State. All 1
l this section is subject to the prov
j. sions that each judge may direct an
l control the business in his own di
: trict, and shall see that it it properl
:. performed"
We think under the minute orde
and circumstances related, the powe
inherent in Judge Curler to exter
the time of filing the notice and stat
ment became conferred upon Juds
Murphy during the formers absenc
and that Judge Murphy became tt
Judge in charge, endowed with the a
thority to grant the extension witho
the presentation of the affidavit sho'
ing the absence or inability of Jud'
Curler, as the rule requires before tt
order can be made by a Judge n
having the business in charge.