Case Name: UTAH COMMERCIAL AND SAVINGS BANK, Respondent, v. THOMAS M. MORGAN, Appellant
Court: Utah Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Utah
Decision Date: 1894-01
Citations: 9 Utah 369
Docket Number: 
Parties: UTAH COMMERCIAL AND SAVINGS BANK, Respondent, v. THOMAS M. MORGAN, Appellant.
Judges: 
Reporter: Utah Reports
Volume: 9
Pages: 369–370

Head Matter:
UTAH COMMERCIAL AND SAVINGS BANK, Respondent, v. THOMAS M. MORGAN, Appellant.
Appeal. — Dismissal.—Failukb to File Transcript. — Under rules 3 and 4 of tlie supreme court, a failure to file tlie trascript on appeal, is cause for dismissing the appeal.
Appeal from tbe district court of the third judicial district, Hon. Charles S. Zane, judge. The opinion states the facts except the following:
Rules 3 and 4 of the supreme court are as follows: “If the transcript be not filed within the time prescribed or allowed [thirty days after the appeal -has been perfected, unless further time is given by the supreme court or a justice thereof] the appeal may be dismissed on motion,” etc. “ On such motion there shall be presented to the court the certificate of the clerk of the court below, under the seal of such court, certifying the amount and character of such judgment, the date of its rendition, the fact and date of the filing of the notice of appeal, and the fact, date, and mode of service thereof; the fact and date of the filing of the undertaking on appeal and that the same is in due form and also that appellant has received a certified transcript of the record, or that he has failed to request one, or has failed to pay, the legal fees therefor, if the same were demanded,” etc.
Messrs. Ritchie and Ritchie, for the appellant.
Messrs. Whittemore and Waite, for the respondent.

Opinion:
PER CukiaM:
On reading and filing the certificate of the clerk of the third judicial district court, whereby it appears that on July 5, 1893, a judgment was made, given and entered in favor of plaintiff, respondent herein, and against defendant, appellant herein, for the suin of six hundred and twelve and 45-100 dollars, and twenty-seven and 50-100 costs with interest, and that on the 15th day of July, 1893, said appellant filed his notice of appeal from said judgment to this court and that on the same, day an undertaking on appeal in due form was filed in said third district court, and it further appearing that no transcript of the record has been requested of the clerk of the said district court by said appellant for filing in this court, now, on motion of counsel for the respondent and under rules three and four in that behalf, it is ordered that the said appeal be and the same is hereby dismissed.