Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1906-03-28
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE
STATE OF NEVADA

es Special Admir-, Of the
Estate of Alexander TwaddIe, de-
ceased,
Plaintiffs and Respondents
v.
| Theodore Winters, A. c. Winters. L,
w. Winters and Samuel longa-
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
becausa 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 judy
ment is dismissed because not taken
until March, 1906, 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 that all business and all
been completed or in the process OF
completion, and all new business that
may 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"-
ply occupied the bench in Reno until
July 81, 1903, when recess was TAX
en- until a further order Of the court.
There was no other session until
Judge Curriers' return on August 18th.
On July 18th, Judge Murphy, in open
court in Reno, made an order allow
ing plaintiff until August 18th IN
which to file objection to findings,
and prepare additional findings. On
August Sd Judge Murphy at Carson
City, AMI within his own first judi
cial district, by an eX parte order
made without affidavit of Judge Cur:
ler's absence or inability, granted tee
defendants until September Is, 1908,
oh to Ia III
serve their notice end statement on
motion for a new tTlal. Later eXteh-
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 w
the written agreement Ct the parties,
o. upon good cause shown. bv tho
court, or the Judge before whom the
case is tried and under district court
rule XLIII which directs that mo
judge, except the judge having charge
of the cause or proceeding shall : ar
further time to plead, move, or do any
act or thing required to be done n
any cause or proceeding. unless it be
shown by affidavit that such 5ntge i:
absent from the state, or from som
other cause is unable to act"
Rule XII provides: When any
district judge shall have entered upor
the trial or hearing Of any cause Il
proceeding, demurrer or motion, OF
,,,Ili fci,
therein, no other judge shall do any
act or thing in Or about said cause
proceeding, demurrer Or motion, un
less upon written request OF the judge
who shall have first entered upon thu
trial or hearing Of said cause, proceed
ing demurrer or notion
Section 1913 of the Compiled laws
passed after section 1917 of the Prac
tice Act as quoted, enacts: The dis
trict judges of the State of Nevada
shall possess equal coeAtensive an,
concurrent jurisdiction and power
They shall each have power to hol'
: court in any county of the State
They shall each exercise and perform
the powers, duties and functions o
the court, and of Judges thereof, ant
| of Judges at Chambers. Each judg
shall have power to transact bushes
i which may be done in chambers a
, any point within the State. All i
! this section is subject to the prov
: sions that each judge ma direct an
| control the business in us 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 exten
the time of filing the notice and stat
ment became conferred upon Jude
Murphy during the formers absenc
and that Judge Murphy became tn
Judge in charge, endowed with the a.
thority to grant the extension witho,
the presentation Of the affidavit shOy
ing the absence or inability of Juds
Curler, as the rule requires before tt
order can be made by a Judge III
having the business in charge.
Judge Curers absence was presur
ed to continue until his return W: