Case Name: CAMPBELL, Respondent, v. COMMON COUNCIL OF CITY OF WATERTOWN et al, Appellants
Court: South Dakota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: South Dakota
Decision Date: 1923-10-18
Citations: 46 S.D. 574
Docket Number: File Nos. 5262, 5293
Parties: CAMPBELL, Respondent, v. COMMON COUNCIL OF CITY OF WATERTOWN et al, Appellants.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Dakota Reports
Volume: 46
Pages: 574–575

Head Matter:
CAMPBELL, Respondent, v. COMMON COUNCIL OF CITY OF WATERTOWN et al, Appellants.
(195 N. W. 442.)
(File Nos. 5262, 5293.
Opinion filed October 18, 1923.)
Appeal and Error — Action—Certiorari—Special 'Proceedings — Order Allowing, a Writ of Certiorari to Review Paving Proceedings Not Final and Appealable; “Action”; “Special Proceeding.”
■Certiorari is not an action, but is a special proceeding within Rev. Code 1919, Secs. 2091, 2092, 2991-3Q05, and an order allowing a writ of certiorari to review a paving proceeding is not appealable under section 31fr8, subd. 2, since it is not final.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Codington County; Hon. W. N. Skinner, Judge.
Action by Eugene P. Campbell against the Common Council of the City of Watertown and others. From an.order allowing a writ of certiorari to review a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendants appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
Arthur L. Sherin, of Watertown, for. Appellants.
Mugene P. Campbell, of Watertown, pro se.
Appellant cited: De N'oma v. Murphy et al, 13.3 N. W. 703; Vickery v. Blair, 134 Ind. 554, 32 N. E. 881; Atwell v. Barnes, 109 Mich. 10, 66 N. W. 583; Hall v. Slabauch, 79 Mich. 484, 37 N. W. 545; People v. Drain 'Comrs., 40 Mich. 745; Comimlissioners v, Kraus, 53 Ohio St. 6I28; 42 N. W. 831; Byram v. Detroit, 50 Mich. 56, 12 N. W. 912; Burlington v. Gilbert, 3.1 Iowa 356, 7 An. Rep. 143; Patterson v. Banner, 43 Iowa 477; Presinger v. Harnes, 114 Ind. 49r, 16 N. E. 495; Board v. Plotner, 149 Ind. lió, 48 N. E. 635; Motz v. Detroit, 18 Mich. 495; Smith v. Car-low, 114 Mich. 67, 72 N. W. 22; Seattle v. Hill, 23 Wash. 92, 62 Pac. 446; State ex rel Noggle v. Crawford, 138 N. W. 2; McKenzie et al v. City of Mandan et al, 160 N. W. 852; Rev. Code 1919, Sec. 6412; State ex rel Brown v. Board of Public Works of City of Red Wing, 159 N. W. 977.

Opinion:
GATES, J.
This is an appeal from an order allowing a writ of certiorari to review certain proceedings of the city of Water-town in the matter of paving Third street N. W.
The appeal is dismissed because the order appealed from is not an appealable order. Section 3168, Rev. Code 1919, defines appealable orders. Certiorari is not an action. Rev. Code 1919, § 2091. It is a special proceeding. Rev. Code 1919, § 2092, 2991-3005. In order to be appealable, an order made in a special proceeding must affect a substantial right and- also be a final order. Rev. Code 1919, § 3168, subd. 2.
Manifestly an order allowing a writ of certiorari cannot be said to be a final order. It is merely an interlocutory order.
Note. — Reported in 195 N. W. 4'42. See, Headnote, American Key-Numbered Digest, Appeal and error, Key-No. 83, 3 C. J. Seo. 394.