Case Name: Peabody v. Thatcher et al.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Colorado
Decision Date: 1877-04
Citations: 3 Colo. 275
Docket Number: 
Parties: Peabody v. Thatcher et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Colorado Reports
Volume: 3
Pages: 275–275

Head Matter:
Peabody v. Thatcher et al.
1. The statute (R. S., p. 513, § 41) provides that “ appeals to the supreme court from the district court shall he allowed in all cases where the judgment or decree appealed from shall be final, and shall amount, exclusive of costs, to the sum of $30, or relate to a franchise or freehold.”
2. Parties cannot confer jurisdiction over the subject-matter of an action by consent.
Appeal from District Court of Pueblo County. ,
Messrs. Symes & Decker, for appellant.
Mr. Charles E. Gast, for appellees.

Opinion:
Wells, J.
The judgment below was for costs merely, and does not relate to a franchise or a freehold.
Ho appeal lies, therefore. Rev. Stat., Ch. lxx., § 41.
It is true the defendant below has joined in error, and so has consented to the appeal. The doctrine of Mollandin v. The Colorado Central Railroad Co. (ante, p. 173), however, is that such consent is ineffectual to confer jurisdiction. We are unable to follow those courts which announce a contrary doctrine. Appeal dismissed.