Case Name: CALIFORNIA CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHARLES MANLEY, Sheriff of Shoshone County, and ALBERT G. KERNS, Receiver of the Property of the Coeur d'Alene Bank, Appellants
Court: Idaho Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Idaho
Decision Date: 1906-04-11
Citations: 12 Idaho 221
Docket Number: 
Parties: CALIFORNIA CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHARLES MANLEY, Sheriff of Shoshone County, and ALBERT G. KERNS, Receiver of the Property of the Coeur d’Alene Bank, Appellants.
Judges: Ailshie, J., and Sullivan, J., concur.
Reporter: Idaho Reports
Volume: 12
Pages: 221–222

Head Matter:
(April 11, 1906.)
CALIFORNIA CONSOLIDATED MINING COMPANY, Respondent, v. CHARLES MANLEY, Sheriff of Shoshone County, and ALBERT G. KERNS, Receiver of the Property of the Coeur d’Alene Bank, Appellants.
[85 Pac. 919.]
Appeal Dismissed When.
1. When the transcript on appeal has not been filed with the clerk of this court within the time provided by the rules, and it does not appear that an extension of time has been granted, a motion to dismiss the appeal will be sustained.
(Syllabus by the court.)
APPEAL from the District Court of the First Judicial District for Shoshone County. Hon. R. T. Morgan, Judge.
Appeal dismissed.
J. H. Forney, for Appellant, cites no authorities on point decided.
A. H. Featherstone and Charles Lund, for Respondent, cite no authorities on point decided.

Opinion:
STOCKSLAGER, C. J.
Respondent moves to dismiss the appeal in this case on the ground that the transcript was not filed with the clerk within the time required by the rules of this court. In support of this motion they file the certificate of the clerk of the district court of Shoshone county, in which he certifies that a "final judgment dated July 24, 1905, in conformity with a decision rendered by the supreme court of Idaho, rendered May 8, 1905, was filed and recorded in the above-named court in the above-entitled action on August 1, 1905; that a notice of appeal therefrom to the supreme court of the state of Idaho and an undertaking on appeal in due form for $300 costs, were filed October 6, 1905, by plaintiff; that plaintiff's praecipe for a transcript of the record for use on appeal was filed November 21, 1905, and on November 24, 1905, a duly certified transcript of the record on appeal was furnished plaintiff."
Upon the foregoing certificate, and it not appearing that an extension of time to prepare and. file a transcript had been granted, the motion to dismiss the appeal is sustained. Costs to respondent.
Ailshie, J., and Sullivan, J., concur.