Case Name: S. R. Roethler, Appellant, v. St. Martins Mineral Springs Hotel Company et al., Respondents, Shipherds Hot Springs, Intervener-Respondent
Court: Washington Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Washington
Decision Date: 1929-11-19
Citations: 154 Wash. 349
Docket Number: No. 22030
Parties: S. R. Roethler, Appellant, v. St. Martins Mineral Springs Hotel Company et al., Respondents, Shipherds Hot Springs, Intervener-Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Washington Reports
Volume: 154
Pages: 349–350

Head Matter:
[No. 22030.
Department One.
November 19, 1929.]
S. R. Roethler, Appellant, v. St. Martins Mineral Springs Hotel Company et al., Respondents, Shipherds Hot Springs, Intervener-Respondent.
Richards & Richards, for appellant.
Bates & Burnett, Bowerman & Kavanaugh, F. Reed McBride, and John Wilkinson, for respondents.
Reported in 282 Pac. 207.

Opinion:
Beals, J.
Plaintiff, a stockholder in defendant, St. Martins Mineral Springs Hotel Co., a corporation, brought this action seeking certain equitable relief to which she claimed to be entitled by reason of her own ership of the stock above referred to. Defendants John Wilkinson and Katherine Haines were also interested in the corporation above named, the former as a stockholder and the latter as secretary. Ship-herds Hot Springs, a corporation, intervened by leave of court and filed a separate answer to plaintiff's complaint. The trial resulted in a decree denying plaintiff the relief which she sought, and dismissing the action. 'This decree bears date February 13,1929, and was filed in the office of the clerk of the superior court on the fifteenth of the same month. May 10, 1929, plaintiff served and filed a notice of appeal.
Respondents, being the persons originally named as defendants in the action, together with the intervener,-have-moved to dismiss this appeal upon the ground that the same was not seasonably taken. This motion- must be granted. Rule X of this court (Rem. 1927 Sup., § 308-10), promulgated January 14, 1927, pursuant to chap. 118, Laws of 1925, Ex. Ses., p. 187 (Rem. 1927 Sup., § 13-1), provides that appeals in civil actions and proceedings must be taken within thirty days after the day of the entry of the final judgment. In the case at bar, the notice of appeal was served and filed May 10, 1929, more than eighty days .after the entry of the decree. The appeal not having been taken within thirty days after the day of the entry of the final judgment, the same must be dismissed. Nudd v. Fuller, 150 Wash. 389, 273 Pac. 200; Davidson v. National Can Co., 150 Wash. 370, 273 Pac. 185.
Appeal dismissed.
Mitchell, C. J., Parker, Tolman, and Millard, JJ., concur.