Case Name: MRS. A. G. GALLAP, Respondent, v. UNION AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant
Court: Idaho Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Idaho
Decision Date: 1924-07-02
Citations: 39 Idaho 352
Docket Number: 
Parties: MRS. A. G. GALLAP, Respondent, v. UNION AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant.
Judges: Budge and William A. Lee, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Idaho Reports
Volume: 39
Pages: 352–354

Head Matter:
(July 2, 1924.)
MRS. A. G. GALLAP, Respondent, v. UNION AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellant.
[228 Pac. 881.]
Appeal — Motion to Dismiss — Failure to File Transcript Within Time Required by Rule.
1. Where a transcript on appeal has not been filed within the time limited by the rules, or an extension thereof, sueh appeal will, upon motion, be dismissed, in the absence of a sufficient showing of diligence by the appellant.
2. Appellant’s failure to apply for extension of time within which to file transcript constitutes lack of diligence, which, being unexplained and unexcnsed, is ground for dismissing the appeal.
APPEAL from the District Court of the Third Judicial District, for Ada County. Hon. Charles F. Reddoeh, Judge.
Action on insurance policy. Judgment for plaintiff.
Appeal dismissed.
J. P. Pope, for Appellant,
files no brief on motion.
Hawley & Hawley for Respondent.
This appeal comes squarely under Rules 26, 27 and 28 of this court. (H. B. Lake & Co. v. Bales, 36 Ida. 142, 210 Pac. 396; Blumauer-Framik Drug Co. v. National Bank, 35 Ida. 436, 206 Pac. 807; Columbia Trust Co. v. Balding, 34 Ida. 579, 205 Pac. 264.)

Opinion:
McCARTHY, C. J.
Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the transcript was not filed in this court within 90 days after the perfection of the appeal, as required by Rule 26, and the time to file the transcript was not extended as provided by Rule 28. The facts are as stated in the motion. Appellant has not shown any reason or excuse for not obtaining an extension of time within which to file the transcript in this court. "While a stipulation in regard to the contents of the transcript was entered into after the making of the motion to dismiss, it expressly saves all rights under that motion. Under Rules 26, 28 and 29, as interpreted and enforced consistently by a long line of decisions beginning with Iowa State Savings Bank v. Twomey, 31 Ida. 683, 175 Pac. 812, and ending with Intermountain Assn. of Credit Men v. Bexburg Farmers Society of Equity, 38 Ida. 121, 220 Pac. 114, appellant's failure to apply for an extension of time within which to file his transcript constituted lack of diligence, and, being unexplained and unexcused, is ground for dismissing the appeal. The motion to dismiss is therefore granted, with, costs to respondent.
Budge and William A. Lee, JJ., concur.