Case Name: Leadbetter and others vs. Laird and others
Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Wisconsin
Decision Date: 1878-08
Citations: 45 Wis. 522
Docket Number: 
Parties: Leadbetter and others vs. Laird and others.
Judges: 
Reporter: Wisconsin Reports
Volume: 45
Pages: 522–523

Head Matter:
Leadbetter and others vs. Laird and others.
Appeal to Supbeme Coubt. (1) Time to appeal from order not extended by subsequent amendment. (2) An amending order held immaterial and unappealable.
1. If an order be amended after notice thereof to the adverse party, this does not extend his time for appealing from the original order; though he may appeal from the amending order within thirty days from notice thereof.
2. Where a complaint was amended before answer or demurrer, by making new parties, an order overruling a subsequent demurrer properly described it as a demurrer to the amended complaint; but afterwards the order was amended by striking out the word “ amended.” Held, that the second order was immaterial and unappealable.
APPEAL from the Circuit Court for Grant County.
The defendants appealed from an order overruling their demurrer to the complaint. The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion.
For the appellants, there was a brief by Bushnell da Clarh, and oral argument by Mr. Bushnell.
For the respondents, there was a brief by Bwrber do Olem-entson, and oral argument by Mr. Olementson.

Opinion:
NtaN, C. J.
This appeal from an order overruling a demurrer must be dismissed, -because it was not taken within thirty days after notice of the order.
The learned counsel for the appellants contends that, because the order was subsequently amended, and the appeal is from the amended order, the dime for taking the appeal should not begin to run until notice of the order as amended. The court is unable to adopt his view.
The time for appealing from every appealable order begins to run from notice of that order. If such an order be amended by a subsequent order, the latter may be appealable, but it cannot extend the time for appeal from the former. That is determined absolutely by the notice.
In the present ease, when the demurrer was taken, there was one complaint only. After it had been served on the appel lants, and before they had demurred, it was amended by adding new parties. Strictly speaking, therefore, it was an amended complaint; and the order accordingly overruled the demurrer to the amended complaint. Afterwards another order was made striking out the word amended from the first order; so as topnake it overrule the demurrer to the complaint. The alteration was quite immaterial. Of the two, perhaps the first was the more correct in form; but both are the same in substance and effect.
If, therefore, the appeal could be taken as from the second order, it should be dismissed because that order is immaterial and unappealable. If it is to be taken'as from the first order, which is material and appealable, it was taken out of time.
By the Gourt. — Appeal dismissed.