Case Name: State of Minnesota ex rel. Seth W. Long and others vs. E. St. Julien Cox
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1879-10-13
Citations: 26 Minn. 214
Docket Number: 
Parties: State of Minnesota ex rel. Seth W. Long and others vs. E. St. Julien Cox.
Judges: 
Reporter: Minnesota Reports
Volume: 26
Pages: 214–215

Head Matter:
State of Minnesota ex rel. Seth W. Long and others vs. E. St. Julien Cox.
October 13, 1879.
Refusal to certify to Case on which a Motion for a New Trial has been heard. After a verdict, the parties stipulated to a statement of the case. A motion was made upon it for a new trial, and at the same time the case was presented to the judge to he approved and certified. The motion was heard on the case as stipulated, and decided; but the judge declined to certify the case as stipulated. Held, that hearing the motion for a new trial on the stipulated case ivas an approval of it, and the judge ought to have then certified to it, and a mandamus will issue requiring-him to certify to it as of the date when so presented to him.
Mandamus, directed to the judge of the 9th judicial dis- „ triet.
B. S. Lewis, for relator.
E. St. Jalien Cox, respondent, pro se.

Opinion:
Gxleillan, C. J.
After a verdict for plaintiff in the cause below, in which tbe relators were defendants, tbe defendants made a statement of the case, and the parties stipulated that it was correct. The defendants thereupon gave notice of a. motion to have the stipulated ease certified and approved by the judge who tried the case, and of a motion at the same-time for a new trial, upon the ease as certified and approved. These motions appear to have been heard, and the motion for a new trial denied. The motion for the certifying of the case was not then decided, but was subsequently renewed and denied. It appears from the order denying it that the motion for a new trial was heard and decided on the case as stipulated by the parties. Hearing the motion on that case was an approval of it, and left nothing for the judge to do, in order to make the case complete, but the mere mechanical act of certifying to it. The judge ought to have certified the case as stipulated by the parties and acted on by him, and as of the date when presented to him to be certified.
Let a peremptory writ issue, commanding the respondent to certify to the case as stipulated, and as of the date of May 27, 1879.