Opinion ID: 1181664
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Motion to strike from record on appeal the affidavit of Ethel M. Smith.

Text: On December 21, 1950, appellant moved the trial court for an order vacating and setting aside the verdict and judgment. This motion was denied by order entered June 13, 1951, and an appeal therefrom was taken August 20, 1951. The record on appeal herein consists solely of the court's order and appellant's notice of motion to which is attached the affidavit of appellant used in support thereof before the trial court. No bill of exceptions was filed. Respondent has moved this court for an order striking the affidavit since it forms no part of a bill of exceptions, contending that only by such a bill, properly settled and allowed and duly filed, can a record be provided in support of the appeal from the order. Appellant, in response, directs our attention to sec. 9385.89, N.C.L. 1929, 1931-1941 Supp., relating to the record on appeal where the appeal is from an order made upon affidavits. That section states: copy of such affidavits and counter affidavits, if any, shall be annexed to the order in place of the bill of exceptions   . Respondent, in reply, contends that this is not an appeal from an order made upon affidavits within the meaning of that section. An examination of the notice of motion demonstrates that this position is well taken. The notice states: That upon the hearing of said motion the defendant will use, refer to and rely upon this notice of motion and the records and files of this action   , the minutes of the said court and Bill of Exceptions    and the transcript of proceedings    and upon any and all matters, exhibits, motions, papers and orders appearing in the said action and upon the oral testimony of J. Callahan, the court reporter who reported said trial and the oral testimony of Mrs. August Brinkby, the residence witness adduced by plaintiff at said trial and the affidavit of the defendant Ethel M. Smith. The grounds for the motion as stated in the notice clearly show that determination of the motion required of the trial court a full reconsideration of evidence presented at the time of trial. As stated in Padilla v. Mason, 53 Nev. 269, 298 P. 657, 658, The order denying the motion to set aside the default was made upon the entire record before the lower court. Section 9395, supra, [being present sec. 9385.89] does not contemplate such a case. The affidavit of Ethel M. Smith, since it is not incorporated in any bill of exceptions, must then be stricken in accordance with respondent's motion.