Case Name: Samuel Edenfield v. David Barnhart
Court: Kansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Kansas
Decision Date: 1869-09
Citations: 5 Kan. 225
Docket Number: 
Parties: Samuel Edenfield v. David Barnhart.
Judges: All tbe justices concurring.
Reporter: Kansas Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 225–226

Head Matter:
Samuel Edenfield v. David Barnhart.
Mrror from Neosho County.
Eaitoit: Dismissing an Appeal. — Error does not lie to this court from an order of the district court refusing to dismiss an appeal until the cause is finally disposed of.
Tliis action, commenced before a justice, went to judgment in that court, and following the taxation of costs is the following entry:
“January 12, 1868. — Defendant presents an appeal bond, signed by his attorney, Joel Barnhart, which bond was deemed insufficient.”
The next entry is of the issuing of an execution, January 15th; the next and last, the return of the execution, January 22d.
The record also contains a bill of exceptions, settled, signed and filed on the 17th of October, 1869, whereby it appears that plaintiff, Edenfield, on the 12th of October filed his motion to dismiss the appeal for the following causes:
“1. That said appeal was not taken and perfected as required by law.
“2. That said defendant did not file a transcript of said judgment within the time prescribed by law.”
This is a sufficient statement of the facts of the case for the presentation of the point decided.
W. C. Webb, for plaintiff in error.
M. V. Boss, for defendant in error.
Mr. Webb, for plaintiff in error, submitted a brief on points doubtless involved in tbe merits of tbe action, and on the point of their jurisdiction determined by tbe court; be filed tbe following:
It has been suggested that tbe order of tbe court below is not a “final order,” and not reviewable by this court. “Tbe jurisdiction of tbe court may be questioned at any time.” It may be raised as well by motion as by plea .or answer, and it would be a singular proceeding which should send tbe plaintiff in error back to tbe district court, there to submit to a trial upon tbe merits, before be could secure a decision on tbe question whether tbe court bad jurisdiction of the action. This court is not literally restricted to tbe powers enumerated in section three, article three, of tbe constitution. It is tbe Supreme Court, and as such, it has and must exercise, ex necessitate, a supervisory control over inferior courts, to keep them within their proper jurisdiction.
No brief for tbe defense.

Opinion:
By the Court,
Kingman, C. J.
Tbe plaintiff in error moved to dismiss an appeal from a justice of tbe peace. Tbe court below refused to dismiss, which refusal was excepted to . and tbe cause brought to this court to reverse that order. Tbe error complained of is one that cannot be brought to this court till the case is finally disposed of. Tbe order is not a final one, nor does it involve tbe merits of tbe action or any part thereof, nor is it one of tbe special orders enumerated in tbe code from which error lies before tbe final decision of tbe cause.
Tbe petition in error must be dismissed.
All tbe justices concurring.